Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26799916›Full record

ArticleProteins2016

Toward a detailed understanding of search trajectories in fragment assembly approaches to protein structure prediction.

Shaun M Kandathil, Julia Handl, Simon C Lovell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proteins, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Shaun M KandathilFaculty of Life Sciences, the University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom.
Julia HandlAlliance Manchester Business School, Faculty of Humanities, the University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom.
Simon C LovellFaculty of Life Sciences, the University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom.

Funding

Medical Research Council G0600147
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Energy functions, fragment libraries, and search methods constitute three key components of fragment-assembly methods for protein structure prediction, which are all crucial for their ability to generate high-accuracy predictions. All of these components are tightly coupled; efficient searching becomes more important as the quality of fragment libraries decreases. Given these relationships, there is currently a poor understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the sampling approaches currently used in fragment-assembly techniques. Here, we determine how the performance of search techniques can be assessed in a meaningful manner, given the above problems. We describe a set of techniques that aim to reduce the impact of the energy function, and assess exploration in view of the search space defined by a given fragment library. We illustrate our approach using Rosetta and EdaFold, and show how certain features of these methods encourage or limit conformational exploration. We demonstrate that individual trajectories of Rosetta are susceptible to local minima in the energy landscape, and that this can be linked to non-uniform sampling across the protein chain. We show that EdaFold's novel approach can help balance broad exploration with locating good low-energy conformations. This occurs through two mechanisms which cannot be readily differentiated using standard performance measures: exclusion of false minima, followed by an increasingly focused search in low-energy regions of conformational space. Measures such as ours can be helpful in characterizing new fragment-based methods in terms of the quality of conformational exploration realized.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsGene LibraryComputer SimulationModels, MolecularPeptide FragmentsProtein ConformationProtein FoldingThermodynamicsPeptide Fragmentsconformational samplingEdaFoldentropyexplorationmultidimensional scalingRosettasearch heuristic

Identifiers

PMID26799916
PMCPMC4982100

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.