Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28239489›Full record

ArticleMolecular systems design & engineering2017

Insights from molecular dynamics simulations for computational protein design.

Matthew Carter Childers, Valerie Daggett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular systems design & engineering, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 103 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
103citing 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

103 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Synthetic and systems biotechnology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

43 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Matthew Carter ChildersDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-5013, United States.
Valerie DaggettDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-5013, United States.

Funding

Bioengineering Cardiovascular Training GrantT32EB001650 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI REGNIER, MICHAEL · 2004 to 2019
$3.6M
Design and characterization of alpha-sheet compounds to target amyloid diseasesR01GM095808 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI DAGGETT, VALERIE D · 2013 to 2016
$1.2M
NIBIB NIH HHS T32 EB001650NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM095808
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A grand challenge in the field of structural biology is to design and engineer proteins that exhibit targeted functions. Although much success on this front has been achieved, design success rates remain low, an ever-present reminder of our limited understanding of the relationship between amino acid sequences and the structures they adopt. In addition to experimental techniques and rational design strategies, computational methods have been employed to aid in the design and engineering of proteins. Molecular dynamics (MD) is one such method that simulates the motions of proteins according to classical dynamics. Here, we review how insights into protein dynamics derived from MD simulations have influenced the design of proteins. One of the greatest strengths of MD is its capacity to reveal information beyond what is available in the static structures deposited in the Protein Data Bank. In this regard simulations can be used to directly guide protein design by providing atomistic details of the dynamic molecular interactions contributing to protein stability and function. MD simulations can also be used as a virtual screening tool to rank, select, identify, and assess potential designs. MD is uniquely poised to inform protein design efforts where the application requires realistic models of protein dynamics and atomic level descriptions of the relationship between dynamics and function. Here, we review cases where MD simulations was used to modulate protein stability and protein function by providing information regarding the conformation(s), conformational transitions, interactions, and dynamics that govern stability and function. In addition, we discuss cases where conformations from protein folding/unfolding simulations have been exploited for protein design, yielding novel outcomes that could not be obtained from static structures.

Indexed as

computational protein designenzyme designmolecular dynamics simulationthermostability

Identifiers

PMID28239489
PMCPMC5321087

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.