Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26945814›Full record

ArticleProteins2016

Blind testing of cross-linking/mass spectrometry hybrid methods in CASP11.

Michael Schneider, Adam Belsom, Juri Rappsilber, Oliver Brock

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 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Protein Structure Prediction with Mass Spectrometry Data.Annual review of physical chemistry · 2022
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. The First MS-Cleavable, Photo-Thiol-Reactive Cross-Linker for Protein Structural Studies.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2019
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Novel Concepts of MS-Cleavable Cross-linkers for Improved Peptide Structure Analysis.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2017
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors.

Michael SchneiderRobotics and Biology Laboratory, Technische Universität Berlin, 10587, Berlin, Germany.
Adam BelsomWellcome Trust Centre for Cell Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH9 3BF, United Kingdom.
Juri RappsilberWellcome Trust Centre for Cell Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH9 3BF, United Kingdom. juri.rappsilber@ed.ac.uk.
Oliver BrockRobotics and Biology Laboratory, Technische Universität Berlin, 10587, Berlin, Germany. oliver.brock@tu-berlin.de.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 084229Wellcome Trust 091020Wellcome Trust 092076Wellcome Trust 103139Wellcome Trust 103139/Z/13/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hybrid approaches combine computational methods with experimental data. The information contained in the experimental data can be leveraged to probe the structure of proteins otherwise elusive to computational methods. Compared with computational methods, the structures produced by hybrid methods exhibit some degree of experimental validation. In spite of these advantages, most hybrid methods have not yet been validated in blind tests, hampering their development. Here, we describe the first blind test of a specific cross-link based hybrid method in CASP. This blind test was coordinated by the CASP organizers and utilized a novel, high-density cross-linking/mass-spectrometry (CLMS) approach that is able to collect high-density CLMS data in a matter of days. This experimental protocol was developed in the Rappsilber laboratory. This approach exploits the chemistry of a highly reactive, photoactivatable cross-linker to produce an order of magnitude more cross-links than homobifunctional cross-linkers. The Rappsilber laboratory generated experimental CLMS data based on this protocol, submitted the data to the CASP organizers which then released this data to the CASP11 prediction groups in a separate, CLMS assisted modeling experiment. We did not observe a clear improvement of assisted models, presumably because the properties of the CLMS data-uncertainty in cross-link identification and residue-residue assignment, and uneven distribution over the protein-were largely unknown to the prediction groups and their approaches were not yet tailored to this kind of data. We also suggest modifications to the CLMS-CASP experiment and discuss the importance of rigorous blind testing in the development of hybrid methods. Proteins 2016; 84(Suppl 1):152-163. © 2016 The Authors Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Indexed as

Models, MolecularModels, StatisticalSoftwareAlgorithmsAmino Acid SequenceComputational BiologyComputer SimulationCross-Linking ReagentsDatabases, ProteinInternational CooperationInternetMass SpectrometryProtein FoldingProtein Interaction Domains and MotifsProteinsProtein Structure, Secondarybis(sulfosuccinimidyl)suberateCross-Linking ReagentsProteinsSuccinimidesblind testCASPcross-linkinghybrid methodsmass spectrometryprotein structure prediction

Identifiers

PMID26945814
PMCPMC5042049

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.