ArticleJournal of biosciences2007
Use of secondary structural information and C alpha-C alpha distance restraints to model protein structures with MODELLER.
Article in Journal of biosciences, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Variations of VEGFR2 Chemical Space: Stimulator and Inhibitory Peptides.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2017Article
- Homology modeling and structural comparison of leucine rich repeats of Toll like receptors 1-10 of ruminants.Journal of molecular modeling · 2013Article
- Constraint-based, homology model of the extracellular domain of the epithelial Na+ channel α subunit reveals a mechanism of channel activation by proteases.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Protein secondary structure predictions and amino acid long range contact map predictions from primary sequence of proteins have been explored to aid in modelling protein tertiary structures. In order to evaluate the usefulness of secondary structure and 3D-residue contact prediction methods to model protein structures we have used the known Q3 (alpha-helix,beta-strands and irregular turns/loops) secondary structure information, along with residue-residue contact information as restraints for MODELLER. We present here results of our modelling studies on 30 best resolved single domain protein structures of varied lengths. The results shows that it is very difficult to obtain useful models even with 100% accurate secondary structure predictions and accurate residue contact predictions for up to 30% of residues in a sequence. The best models that we obtained for proteins of lengths 37, 70, 118, 136 and 193 amino acid residues are of RMSDs 4.17, 5.27, 9.12, 7.89 and 9.69,respectively. The results show that one can obtain better models for the proteins which have high percent of alpha-helix content. This analysis further shows that MODELLER restrain optimization program can be useful only if we have truly homologous structure(s) as a template where it derives numerous restraints, almost identical to the templates used. This analysis also clearly indicates that even if we satisfy several true residue-residue contact distances, up to 30%of their sequence length with fully known secondary structural information, we end up predicting model structures much distant from their corresponding native structures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17914235What 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.