4.5 Article

RCSB Protein Data Bank: A Resource for Chemical, Biochemical, and Structural Explorations of Large and Small Biomolecules

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION
卷 93, 期 3, 页码 569-575

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00404

关键词

General Public; High School/Introductory Chemistry; First-Year Undergraduate/General; Graduate Education/Research; Biochemistry; Interdisciplinary/Multidisciplinary; Internet/Web-Based Learning; Nucleic Acids/DNA/RNA; Proteins/Peptides; X-ray Crystallography

资金

  1. NSF [DBI-1338415]
  2. NIH
  3. DOE
  4. Div Of Biological Infrastructure
  5. Direct For Biological Sciences [1338415] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Research Collaboratory for Structural Bioinformatics (RCSB) Protein Data Bank (PDB) supports scientific research and education worldwide by providing access to annotated information about three-dimensional (3D) structures of macromolecules (e.g., nucleic acids, proteins), and associated small molecules (e.g., drugs, cofactors, inhibitors) in the PDB archive. Researchers, educators, and students use RCSB PDB resources to study the shape and interactions of biological molecules and their implications in molecular biology, medicine, biotechnology, and beyond. RCSB PDB supports development of standards for data deposition, representation, annotation, and validation of atomic structural data obtained from various experimental methods. Uniform representation of PDB data is essential for providing consistent search and analysis capabilities for all PDB users, from beginning students to domain experts. The RCSB PDB Web site provides tools for searching, visualizing, and analyzing PDB data, including easy exploration of chemical interactions that stabilize macromolecules and play important roles in their interactions and functions. In addition, educational resources are available for free and unrestricted use in the classroom for exploring chemistry and biology at the molecular level.

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

4.5
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