Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28374045›Full record

ArticleEuropean biophysics journal : EBJ2017

PDB2CD visualises dynamics within protein structures.

Robert W Janes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European biophysics journal : EBJ, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Intrinsically disordered HAX-1 regulates CaBiochimica et biophysica acta. Biomembranes · 2020
    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

1 author.

Robert W JanesSchool of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, Mile End Road, London, E1 4NS, UK. r.w.janes@qmul.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5483-6282

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/J019194/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proteins tend to have defined conformations, a key factor in enabling their function. Atomic resolution structures of proteins are predominantly obtained by either solution nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) or crystal structure methods. However, when considering a protein whose structure has been determined by both these approaches, on many occasions, the resultant conformations are subtly different, as illustrated by the examples in this study. The solution NMR approach invariably results in a cluster of structures whose conformations satisfy the distance boundaries imposed by the data collected; it might be argued that this is evidence of the dynamics of proteins when in solution. In crystal structures, the proteins are often in an energy minimum state which can result in an increase in the extent of regular secondary structure present relative to the solution state depicted by NMR, because the more dynamic ends of alpha helices and beta strands can become ordered at the lower temperatures. This study examines a novel way to display the differences in conformations within an NMR ensemble and between these and a crystal structure of a protein. Circular dichroism (CD) spectroscopy can be used to characterise protein structures in solution. Using the new bioinformatics tool, PDB2CD, which generates CD spectra from atomic resolution protein structures, the differences between, and possible dynamic range of, conformations adopted by a protein can be visualised.

Indexed as

Circular DichroismComputational BiologyNuclear Magnetic Resonance, BiomolecularProtein Conformation, alpha-HelicalProtein Conformation, beta-StrandProteinsProteinsBioinformaticsCircular dichroism spectroscopyProtein conformationProtein crystal structuresProtein dynamicsProtein NMR solution structures

Identifiers

PMID28374045
PMCPMC5599472

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.