ReviewArchives of biochemistry and biophysics2016
Computational crystallization.
Review in Archives of biochemistry and biophysics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine Learning-Enhanced Molecular Dynamics of 4,4'-Bipyridine in a Break Junction: A Supramolecular Origin of the High Conductance.ACS nanoscience Au · 2026Article
- Application of a Rational Crystal Contact Engineering Strategy on a Poly(ethylene terephthalate)-Degrading Cutinase.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- 20 years of crystal hits: progress and promise in ultrahigh-throughput crystallization screening.Acta crystallographica. Section D, Structural biology · 2023Article
- Article
- Review
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
Abstract
Crystallization is a key step in macromolecular structure determination by crystallography. While a robust theoretical treatment of the process is available, due to the complexity of the system, the experimental process is still largely one of trial and error. In this article, efforts in the field are discussed together with a theoretical underpinning using a solubility phase diagram. Prior knowledge has been used to develop tools that computationally predict the crystallization outcome and define mutational approaches that enhance the likelihood of crystallization. For the most part these tools are based on binary outcomes (crystal or no crystal), and the full information contained in an assembly of crystallization screening experiments is lost. The potential of this additional information is illustrated by examples where new biological knowledge can be obtained and where a target can be sub-categorized to predict which class of reagents provides the crystallization driving force. Computational analysis of crystallization requires complete and correctly formatted data. While massive crystallization screening efforts are under way, the data available from many of these studies are sparse. The potential for this data and the steps needed to realize this potential are discussed.
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.