Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20829099›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in chemical biology2010

Conformational diversity and computational enzyme design.

Jonathan K Lassila

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in chemical biology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Engineered control of enzyme structural dynamics and function.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2018
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Multistate approaches in computational protein design.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2012
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Computational Enzyme Design: Advances, hurdles and possible ways forward.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2012
    Review
  19. Enzyme informatics.Current topics in medicinal chemistry · 2012
    Review
  20. 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

1 author.

Jonathan K LassilaDepartment of Biochemistry, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. jklassila@gmail.com

Funding

Catalytic specificity of zinc phosphate esterases investigated by evolutionF32GM080865 · NIGMS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI LASSILA, JONATHAN K · 2007 to 2009
$142k
NIGMS NIH HHS F32 GM080865
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The application of computational protein design methods to the design of enzyme active sites offers potential routes to new catalysts and new reaction specificities. Computational design methods have typically treated the protein backbone as a rigid structure for the sake of computational tractability. However, this fixed-backbone approximation introduces its own special challenges for enzyme design and it contrasts with an emerging picture of natural enzymes as dynamic ensembles with multiple conformations and motions throughout a reaction cycle. This review considers the impact of conformational variation and dynamics on computational enzyme design and it highlights new approaches to addressing protein conformational diversity in enzyme design including recent advances in multi-state design, backbone flexibility, and computational library design.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationDrug DesignEnzymesHumansProtein ConformationProteinsEnzymesProteins

Identifiers

PMID20829099
PMCPMC2953567

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.