ArticleJournal of biomolecular NMR2007
Theoretical framework for NMR residual dipolar couplings in unfolded proteins.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A maximum entropy approach to the study of residue-specific backbone angle distributions in α-synuclein, an intrinsically disordered protein.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2014Article
- The arginine-rich RNA-binding motif of HIV-1 Rev is intrinsically disordered and folds upon RRE binding.Biophysical journal · 2013Article
- The magic of bicelles lights up membrane protein structure.Chemical reviews · 2012Review
- Investigation of the Polymeric Properties of α-Synuclein and Comparison with NMR Experiments: A Replica Exchange Molecular Dynamics Study.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2012Article
- Quantitative determination of site-specific conformational distributions in an unfolded protein by solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance.Journal of molecular biology · 2009Article
- Probing the urea dependence of residual structure in denatured human alpha-lactalbumin.Journal of biomolecular NMR · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
17619170What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.