4.7 Article

Integrating single-molecule spectroscopy and simulations for the study of intrinsically disordered proteins

期刊

METHODS
卷 193, 期 -, 页码 116-135

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2021.03.018

关键词

Intrinsically disordered proteins; Single-molecule spectroscopy; All-atom simulations; Molecular simulations; smFRET; Fluorescence correlation spectroscopy; Protein folding; Forster resonance energy transfer; FRET

资金

  1. NIGMS [GM103757]
  2. Longer Life Foundation - RGA/Washington University Collaboration
  3. NIA [AG062837]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Over the past two decades, intrinsically disordered proteins and protein regions have been recognized as essential drivers of cellular function, with singlemolecule fluorescence spectroscopy and molecular simulations providing insight into their behavior. When combined, these techniques offer complementary information that can help uncover complex molecular details.
Over the last two decades, intrinsically disordered proteins and protein regions (IDRs) have emerged from a niche corner of biophysics to be recognized as essential drivers of cellular function. Various techniques have provided fundamental insight into the function and dysfunction of IDRs. Among these techniques, singlemolecule fluorescence spectroscopy and molecular simulations have played a major role in shaping our modern understanding of the sequence-encoded conformational behavior of disordered proteins. While both techniques are frequently used in isolation, when combined they offer synergistic and complementary information that can help uncover complex molecular details. Here we offer an overview of single-molecule fluorescence spectroscopy and molecular simulations in the context of studying disordered proteins. We discuss the various means in which simulations and single-molecule spectroscopy can be integrated, and consider a number of studies in which this integration has uncovered biological and biophysical mechanisms.

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

4.7
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