Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25102226›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2014

Blind predictions of DNA and RNA tweezers experiments with force and torque.

Fang-Chieh Chou, Jan Lipfert, Rhiju Das

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Twisting DNA by salt.Nucleic acids research · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Sequence-dependent RNA helix conformational preferences predictably impact tertiary structure formation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Double-stranded RNA under force and torque: similarities to and striking differences from double-stranded DNA.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014
    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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Fang-Chieh ChouDepartment of Biochemistry, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Jan LipfertDepartment of Bionanoscience, Kavli Institute of Nanoscience, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands; Department of Physics and Center for Nanoscience (CeNS), University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Rhiju DasDepartment of Biochemistry, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America; Biophysics Program, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America; Department of Physics, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Stanford University · USCenter for NanoScience · DE

Funding

Correcting Pervasive Errors in RNA Crystallography with RosettaR21GM102716 · NIGMS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI DAS, RHIJU · 2012 to 2013
$302k
Howard Hughes Medical InstituteNIGMS NIH HHS R21 GM102716NIGMS NIH HHS R21GM102716Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Single-molecule tweezers measurements of double-stranded nucleic acids (dsDNA and dsRNA) provide unprecedented opportunities to dissect how these fundamental molecules respond to forces and torques analogous to those applied by topoisomerases, viral capsids, and other biological partners. However, tweezers data are still most commonly interpreted post facto in the framework of simple analytical models. Testing falsifiable predictions of state-of-the-art nucleic acid models would be more illuminating but has not been performed. Here we describe a blind challenge in which numerical predictions of nucleic acid mechanical properties were compared to experimental data obtained recently for dsRNA under applied force and torque. The predictions were enabled by the HelixMC package, first presented in this paper. HelixMC advances crystallography-derived base-pair level models (BPLMs) to simulate kilobase-length dsDNAs and dsRNAs under external forces and torques, including their global linking numbers. These calculations recovered the experimental bending persistence length of dsRNA within the error of the simulations and accurately predicted that dsRNA's "spring-like" conformation would give a two-fold decrease of stretch modulus relative to dsDNA. Further blind predictions of helix torsional properties, however, exposed inaccuracies in current BPLM theory, including three-fold discrepancies in torsional persistence length at the high force limit and the incorrect sign of dsRNA link-extension (twist-stretch) coupling. Beyond these experiments, HelixMC predicted that 'nucleosome-excluding' poly(A)/poly(T) is at least two-fold stiffer than random-sequence dsDNA in bending, stretching, and torsional behaviors; Z-DNA to be at least three-fold stiffer than random-sequence dsDNA, with a near-zero link-extension coupling; and non-negligible effects from base pair step correlations. We propose that experimentally testing these predictions should be powerful next steps for understanding the flexibility of dsDNA and dsRNA in sequence contexts and under mechanical stresses relevant to their biology.

Indexed as

Nucleic Acid ConformationTorqueAlgorithmsComputer SimulationDNAElastic ModulusModels, MolecularNanotechnologyRNADNARNA

Identifiers

PMID25102226
PMCPMC4125081
OpenAlexW2138296927

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.