Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25287625›Full record

ArticleProtein science : a publication of the Protein Society2015

Computational de novo design of a four-helix bundle protein--DND_4HB.

Grant S Murphy, Bharatwaj Sathyamoorthy, Bryan S Der, Mischa C Machius, Surya V Pulavarti, Thomas Szyperski, Brian Kuhlman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Design of complicated all-α protein structures.Nature structural & molecular biology · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. How to Design Peptides.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Practical Considerations for Atomistic Structure Modeling with Cryo-EM Maps.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2020
    Article
  8. Advances in protein structure prediction and design.Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology · 2019
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Protein engineering in the 21st century.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2015
    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

7 authors.

Grant S MurphyDepartment of Chemistry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 27599-3290.
Bharatwaj Sathyamoorthy
Bryan S Der
Mischa C Machius
Surya V Pulavarti
Thomas Szyperski
Brian Kuhlman

Funding

University of Georgia ProjectU54GM094597 · NIGMS · RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIV OF N.J. · PI MONTELIONE, GAETANO T · 2010 to 2014
$36.9M
Designing Affinity and Specificity at Protein InterfacesR01GM073960 · NIGMS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI KUHLMAN, BRIAN A · 2005 to 2018
$3.1M
NIGMS NIH HHS GM084042NIGMS NIH HHS GM094597NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM073960NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM094597
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The de novo design of proteins is a rigorous test of our understanding of the key determinants of protein structure. The helix bundle is an interesting de novo design model system due to the diverse topologies that can be generated from a few simple α-helices. Previously, noncomputational studies demonstrated that connecting amphipathic helices together with short loops can sometimes generate helix bundle proteins, regardless of the bundle's exact sequence. However, using such methods, the precise positions of helices and side chains cannot be predetermined. Since protein function depends on exact positioning of residues, we examined if sequence design tools in the program Rosetta could be used to design a four-helix bundle with a predetermined structure. Helix position was specified using a folding procedure that constrained the design model to a defined topology, and iterative rounds of rotamer-based sequence design and backbone refinement were used to identify a low energy sequence for characterization. The designed protein, DND_4HB, unfolds cooperatively (Tm >90°C) and a NMR solution structure shows that it adopts the target helical bundle topology. Helices 2, 3, and 4 agree very closely with the design model (backbone RMSD = 1.11 Å) and >90% of the core side chain χ1 and χ2 angles are correctly predicted. Helix 1 lies in the target groove against the other helices, but is displaced 3 Å along the bundle axis. This result highlights the potential of computational design to create bundles with atomic-level precision, but also points at remaining challenges for achieving specific positioning between amphipathic helices.

Indexed as

Amino Acid SequenceCloning, MolecularModels, MolecularMolecular Sequence DataNuclear Magnetic Resonance, BiomolecularProtein ConformationProtein EngineeringProtein FoldingRecombinant ProteinsRecombinant Proteinscomputational protein designde novo protein designfour-helix bundleNMR structurerosetta

Identifiers

PMID25287625
PMCPMC4380976

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.