4.8 Article

Improved Cross Validation of a Static Ubiquitin Structure Derived from High Precision Residual Dipolar Couplings Measured in a Drug-Based Liquid Crystalline Phase

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 136, 期 10, 页码 3752-3755

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ja4132642

关键词

-

资金

  1. Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
  2. Intramural Antiviral Target Program of the Office of the Director, NIH

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The antibiotic squalamine forms a lyotropic liquid crystal at very low concentrations in water (0.3-3.5% w/v), which remains stable over a wide range of temperature (1-40 degrees C) and pH (4-8). Squalamine is positively charged, and comparison of the alignment of ubiquitin relative to 36 previously reported alignment conditions shows that it differs substantially from most of these, but is closest to liquid crystalline cetyl pyridinium bromide. High precision residual dipolar couplings (RDCs) measured for the backbone H-1-N-15, C-13', H-1(alpha)-C-13(alpha), and C-13'-C-13(alpha) one-bond interactions in the squalamine medium fit well to the static structural model previously derived from NMR data. Inclusion into the structure refinement procedure of these RDCs, together with H-1-N-15 and H-1(alpha)-C-13(alpha) RDCs newly measured in Pf1, results in improved agreement between alignment-induced changes in C-13' chemical shift, (3)J(HNH alpha) values, and C-13(alpha)-C-13(beta) RDCs and corresponding values predicted by the structure, thereby validating the high quality of the single-conformer structural model. This result indicates that fitting of a single model to experimental data provides a better description of the average conformation than does averaging over previously reported NMR-derived ensemble representations. The latter can capture dynamic aspects of a protein, thus making the two representations valuable complements to one another.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据