4.7 Article

Improved cryoEM-Guided Iterative Molecular Dynamics-Rosetta Protein Structure Refinement Protocol for High Precision Protein Structure Prediction

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL THEORY AND COMPUTATION
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 1337-1346

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ct500995d

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health
  2. National Science Foundation [PHY-0822283]
  3. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  4. National Biomedical Computation Resource
  5. NSF Supercomputer Centers
  6. American Heart Association [12POST11570005]
  7. Center for Theoretical Biological Physics
  8. Division Of Physics
  9. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1427654, 1308264] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many excellent methods exist that incorporate cryo-electron microscopy (cryoEM) data to constrain computational protein structure prediction and refinement. Previously, it was shown that iteration of two such orthogonal sampling and scoring methods - Rosetta and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations - facilitated exploration of conformational space in principle. Here, we go beyond a proof-of-concept study and address significant remaining limitations of the iterative MD-Rosetta protein structure refinement protocol. Specifically, all parts of the iterative refinement protocol are now guided by medium-resolution cryoEM density maps, and previous knowledge about the native structure of the protein is no longer necessary. Models are identified solely based on score or simulation time. All four benchmark proteins showed substantial improvement through three rounds of the iterative refinement protocol. The best-scoring final models of two proteins had sub,Angstrom RMSD to the native structure over residues in secondary structure elements. Molecular dynamics was most efficient in refining secondary structure elements and was thus highly complementary to the Rosetta refinement which is most powerful in refining side chains and loop regions.

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