ArticleMethods in enzymology2015
Full Atom Simulations of Spin Label Conformations.
Article in Methods in enzymology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- FRETpredict: a Python package for FRET efficiency predictions using rotamer libraries.Communications biology · 2024Article
- A novel approach to modeling side chain ensembles of the bifunctional spin label RX.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Methodology for rigorous modeling of protein conformational changes by Rosetta using DEER distance restraints.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- DEER-PREdict: Software for efficient calculation of spin-labeling EPR and NMR data from conformational ensembles.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- Atomistic Models from Orientation and Distance Constraints Using EPR of a Bifunctional Spin Label.Biophysical journal · 2019Article
- Confidence Analysis of DEER Data and Its Structural Interpretation with Ensemble-Biased Metadynamics.Biophysical journal · 2018Article
- The contribution of modern EPR to structural biology.Emerging topics in life sciences · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Interpretation of EPR measurables from spin labels in terms of structure and dynamics requires knowledge of label behavior. General strategies were developed for simulation of labels used in EPR of proteins. The criteria for those simulations are (a) exhaustive sampling of rotamer space, (b) consensus of results independent of starting points, and (c) inclusion of entropy. These criteria are satisfied only when the number of transitions in any dihedral angle exceeds 100 and the simulation maintains thermodynamic equilibrium. Methods such as conventional MD do not efficiently cross energetic barriers, simulated anealing, Monte Carlo or popular Rotamer Library methodologies are potential energy based and ignore entropy (in addition to their specific shortcomings: environment fluctuations, fixed environment, or electrostatics). The Simulated scaling method avoids the above flaws by modulating the force fields between a reduced (allowing crossing energy barriers) and full potential (sampling minima). Spin label diffuses on this surface while remaining in thermodynamic equilibrium. Simulations show that (a) adopting a single conformation is rare, often there are two to four populated rotamers and (b) position of the NO varies up to 16 Å. These results illustrate necessity for caution when interpreting EPR signals in terms of molecular structure. For example, the 10-16 Å distance change in DEER should not be interpreted as a large conformational change, it can well be a flip about Cα-Cβ bond. Rigorous exploration of possible rotamer structures of a spin label is paramount in signal interpretation. We advocate use of bifunctional labels, motion of which is restricted 10,000-fold and the NO position is restricted to 2-5 Å.
Indexed as
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.