Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17619170›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomolecular NMR2007

Theoretical framework for NMR residual dipolar couplings in unfolded proteins.

O I Obolensky, Kai Schlepckow, Harald Schwalbe, A V Solov'yov

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomolecular NMR, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

O I ObolenskyFrankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies, Max-von-Laue-Str. 1, 60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany. obolensky@fias.uni-frankfurt.de
Kai Schlepckow
Harald Schwalbe
A V Solov'yov

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A theoretical framework for the prediction of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) residual dipolar couplings (RDCs) in unfolded proteins under weakly aligning conditions is presented. The unfolded polypeptide chain is modeled as a random flight chain while the alignment medium is represented by a set of regularly arranged obstacles. For the case of bicelles oriented perpendicular to the magnetic field, a closed-form analytical result is derived. With the obtained analytical expression the RDCs are readily accessible for any locus along the chain, for chains of differing length, and for varying bicelle concentrations. The two general features predicted by the model are (i) RDCs in the center segments of a polypeptide chain are larger than RDCs in the end segments, resulting in a bell-shaped sequential distribution of RDCs, and (ii) couplings are larger for shorter chains than for longer chains at a given bicelle concentration. Experimental data available from the literature confirm the first prediction of the model, providing a tool for recognizing fully unfolded polypeptide chains. With less certainty experimental data appear to support the second prediction as well. However, more systematic experimental studies are needed in order to validate or disprove the predictions of the model. The presented framework is an important step towards a solid theoretical foundation for the analysis of experimentally measured RDCs in unfolded proteins in the case of alignment media such as polyacrylamide gels and neutral bicelle systems which align biomacromolecules by a steric mechanism. Various improvements and generalizations are possible within the suggested approach.

Indexed as

Models, MolecularProtein FoldingApoproteinsMyoglobinNuclear Magnetic Resonance, BiomolecularPeptidesProtein DenaturationUreaApoproteinsMyoglobinPeptidesUrea

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.