Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22808083›Full record

ArticlePloS one2012

Analysis of conformational variation in macromolecular structural models.

Sandeep Kumar Srivastava, Savitha Gayathri, Babu A Manjasetty, Balasubramanian Gopal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 7 Å resolution in protein two-dimensional-crystal X-ray diffraction at Linac Coherent Light Source.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2014
    Article
  4. 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.

Sandeep Kumar SrivastavaMolecular Biophysics Unit, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India. sandeep@mbu.iisc.ernet.in
Savitha Gayathri
Babu A Manjasetty
Balasubramanian Gopal

Funding

Wellcome Trust 078994
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Experimental conditions or the presence of interacting components can lead to variations in the structural models of macromolecules. However, the role of these factors in conformational selection is often omitted by in silico methods to extract dynamic information from protein structural models. Structures of small peptides, considered building blocks for larger macromolecular structural models, can substantially differ in the context of a larger protein. This limitation is more evident in the case of modeling large multi-subunit macromolecular complexes using structures of the individual protein components. Here we report an analysis of variations in structural models of proteins with high sequence similarity. These models were analyzed for sequence features of the protein, the role of scaffolding segments including interacting proteins or affinity tags and the chemical components in the experimental conditions. Conformational features in these structural models could be rationalized by conformational selection events, perhaps induced by experimental conditions. This analysis was performed on a non-redundant dataset of protein structures from different SCOP classes. The sequence-conformation correlations that we note here suggest additional features that could be incorporated by in silico methods to extract dynamic information from protein structural models.

Indexed as

Models, MolecularAmino Acid SequenceComputer SimulationCrystallography, X-RayDatabases, ProteinHumansMolecular Sequence DataOligopeptidesProteinsProtein Structure, SecondaryProtein Structure, TertiarySequence Homology, Amino AcidOligopeptidesProteins

Identifiers

PMID22808083
PMCPMC3392262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.