ArticleNatural products and bioprospecting2014
Free energy of binding of coiled-coil complexes with different electrostatic environments: the influence of force field polarisation and capping.
Article in Natural products and bioprospecting, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sequence Prediction, Structural Modelling and the Challenges of Plasticity in Coiled Coils.Sub-cellular biochemistry · 2026Review
- Assessment of the Topology and Oligomerisation States of Coiled Coils Using Metadynamics with Conformational Restraints.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coiled-coils are well known protein-protein interaction motifs, with the leucine zipper region of activator protein-1 (AP-1) consisting of the c-Jun and c-Fos proteins being a typical example. Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations using the MM/GBSA method have been used to predict the free energy of interaction of these proteins. The influence of force field polarisation and capping on the predicted free energy of binding of complexes with different electrostatic environments (net charge) were investigated. Although both force field polarisation and peptide capping are important for the prediction of the absolute free energy of binding, peptide capping has the largest influence on the predicted free energy of binding. Polarisable simulations appear better suited to determine structural properties of the complexes of these proteins while non-polarisable simulations seem to give better predictions of the associated free energies of binding.
Identifiers
What 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.