ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2016
Blind tests of RNA nearest-neighbor energy prediction.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diaminopurine in Nonenzymatic RNA Template Copying.Journal of the American Chemical Society · 2024Article
- Prediction of 3D RNA Structures from Sequence Using Energy Landscapes of RNA Dimers: Application to RNA Tetraloops.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2024Article
- Modified RNAs and predictions with the ViennaRNA Package.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Recent Advances in NMR Protein Structure Prediction with ROSETTA.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- A Test and Refinement of Folding Free Energy Nearest Neighbor Parameters for RNA Including NJournal of molecular biology · 2022Article
- Secondary structure prediction for RNA sequences including NNature communications · 2022Article
- Article
- Predictions and analyses of RNA nearest neighbor parameters for modified nucleotides.Nucleic acids research · 2020Article
- A robust model for quantitative prediction of the silencing efficacy of wild-type and A-to-I edited miRNAs.RNA biology · 2020Article
- Sequence-dependent RNA helix conformational preferences predictably impact tertiary structure formation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
- Stability of RNA duplexes containing inosine·cytosine pairs.Nucleic acids research · 2018Article
- Chemically Accurate Relative Folding Stability of RNA Hairpins from Molecular Simulations.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2018Article
- Blind prediction of noncanonical RNA structure at atomic accuracy.Science advances · 2018Article
- The Rosetta All-Atom Energy Function for Macromolecular Modeling and Design.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2017Article
- RNA-Puzzles Round III: 3D RNA structure prediction of five riboswitches and one ribozyme.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2017Article
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
The predictive modeling and design of biologically active RNA molecules requires understanding the energetic balance among their basic components. Rapid developments in computer simulation promise increasingly accurate recovery of RNA's nearest-neighbor (NN) free-energy parameters, but these methods have not been tested in predictive trials or on nonstandard nucleotides. Here, we present, to our knowledge, the first such tests through a RECCES-Rosetta (reweighting of energy-function collection with conformational ensemble sampling in Rosetta) framework that rigorously models conformational entropy, predicts previously unmeasured NN parameters, and estimates these values' systematic uncertainties. RECCES-Rosetta recovers the 10 NN parameters for Watson-Crick stacked base pairs and 32 single-nucleotide dangling-end parameters with unprecedented accuracies: rmsd of 0.28 kcal/mol and 0.41 kcal/mol, respectively. For set-aside test sets, RECCES-Rosetta gives rmsd values of 0.32 kcal/mol on eight stacked pairs involving G-U wobble pairs and 0.99 kcal/mol on seven stacked pairs involving nonstandard isocytidine-isoguanosine pairs. To more rigorously assess RECCES-Rosetta, we carried out four blind predictions for stacked pairs involving 2,6-diaminopurine-U pairs, which achieved 0.64 kcal/mol rmsd accuracy when tested by subsequent experiments. Overall, these results establish that computational methods can now blindly predict energetics of basic RNA motifs, including chemically modified variants, with consistently better than 1 kcal/mol accuracy. Systematic tests indicate that resolving the remaining discrepancies will require energy function improvements beyond simply reweighting component terms, and we propose further blind trials to test such efforts.
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.