The present work uses 129 nucleobase – amino acid CCSD(T)/CBS stacking and T-shaped interaction energies as reference data to test the ability of various density functionals with double-zeta quality basis sets, as well as some semi-empirical and molecular mechanics methods, to accurately describe noncovalent DNA–protein π–π and π+–π interactions. The goal of this work is to identify methods that can be used in hybrid approaches (QM/MM, ONIOM) for large-scale modeling of enzymatic systems involving active-site (substrate) π–π contacts. Our results indicate that AMBER is a more appropriate choice for the lower-level method in hybrid techniques than popular semi-empirical methods (AM1, PM3), and suggest that AMBER accurately describes the π–π interactions found throughout DNA–protein complexes. The M06–2X and PBE-D density functionals were found to provide very promising descriptions of the 129 nucleobase – amino acid interaction energies, which suggests that these may be the most suitable methods for describing high-level regions. Therefore, M06–2X and PBE-D with both the 6–31G(d) and 6–31+G(d,p) basis sets were further examined through potential-energy surface scans to better understand how these techniques describe DNA–protein π–π interactions in both minimum and nonminimum regions of the potential-energy surfaces, which is critical information when modeling enzymatic reaction pathways. Our results suggest that studies of stacked nucleobase – amino acid systems should implement the PBE-D/6–31+G(d,p) method. However, if T-shaped contacts are involved and (or) smaller basis sets must be considered due to limitations in computational resources, then M06–2X/6–31G(d) provides an overall excellent description of both nucleobase – amino acid stacking and T-shaped interactions for a range of DNA–protein π–π and π+–π interactions.
Characterizing and Understanding the Remarkably Slow Basis Set Convergence of Several Minnesota Density Functionals for Intermolecular Interaction Energies
