Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21344535›Full record

ArticleProtein science : a publication of the Protein Society2011

Relative stability of de novo four-helix bundle proteins: insights from coarse grained molecular simulations.

Giovanni Bellesia, Andrew I Jewett, Joan-Emma Shea

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Dissecting the stability determinants of a challenging de novo protein fold using massively parallel design and experimentation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

3 authors.

Giovanni BellesiaDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry and Department of Physics, University of California Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California 93106, USA. gbellesia@lanl.gov
Andrew I Jewett
Joan-Emma Shea

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We use a recently developed coarse-grained computational model to investigate the relative stability of two different sets of de novo designed four-helix bundle proteins. Our simulations suggest a possible explanation for the experimentally observed increase in stability of the four-helix bundles with increasing sequence length. In details, we show that both short subsequences composed only by polar residues and additional nonpolar residues inserted, via different point mutations in ad hoc positions, seem to play a significant role in stabilizing the four-helix bundle conformation in the longer sequences. Finally, we propose an additional mutation that rescues a short amino acid sequence that would otherwise adopt a compact misfolded state. Our work suggests that simple computational models can be used as a complementary tool in the design process of de novo proteins.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationModels, MolecularProtein Structure, SecondaryAlgorithmsProtein ConformationProtein FoldingProteinsProtein StabilityProtein Structure, TertiaryProteins

Identifiers

PMID21344535
PMCPMC3125866

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.