Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30222348›Full record

ArticleThe journal of physical chemistry. B2018

Interpreting Hydrogen-Deuterium Exchange Events in Proteins Using Atomistic Simulations: Case Studies on Regulators of G-Protein Signaling Proteins.

Hossein Mohammadiarani, Vincent S Shaw, Richard R Neubig, Harish Vashisth

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of physical chemistry. B, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Recent Advances in NMR Protein Structure Prediction with ROSETTA.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Protein Structure Prediction with Mass Spectrometry Data.Annual review of physical chemistry · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Dramatic Shape Changes Occur as CytochromeThe journal of physical chemistry. B · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hossein MohammadiaraniDepartment of Chemical Engineering , University of New Hampshire , Durham , New Hampshire 03824 , United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4748-6581
Vincent S ShawDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology , Michigan State University , East Lansing , Michigan 48825 , United States.
Richard R NeubigDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology , Michigan State University , East Lansing , Michigan 48825 , United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0501-0008
Harish VashisthDepartment of Chemical Engineering , University of New Hampshire , Durham , New Hampshire 03824 , United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2087-2880
Michigan State University · USUniversity of New Hampshire · US

Funding

Integrative Training in the Pharmacological SciencesT32GM092715 · NIGMS · MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY · PI NEUBIG, RICHARD R · 2011 to 2020
$1.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM092715
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hydrogen-deuterium exchange (HDX) experiments are widely used in studies of protein dynamics. To predict the propensity of amide hydrogens for exchange with deuterium, several models have been reported in which computations of amide-hydrogen protection factors are carried out using molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. Given significant variation in the criteria used in different models, the robustness and broader applicability of these models to other proteins, especially homologous proteins showing distinct amide-exchange patterns, remains unknown. The sensitivity of the predictions when MD simulations are conducted with different force-fields is yet to tested and quantified. Using MD simulations and experimental HDX data on three homologous signaling proteins, we report detailed studies quantifying the performance of seven previously reported models (M1-M7) of two general types: empirical and fractional-population models. We find that the empirical models show inconsistent predictions but predictions of the fractional population models are robust. Contrary to previously reported work, we find that the solvent-accessible surface area of amide hydrogens is a useful metric when combined with a new metric defining the distances of amide hydrogens from the first polar atoms in proteins. On the basis of this, we report two new models, one empirical (M8) and one population-based (M9). We find strong protection of amide hydrogens from solvent exchange both within the stable helical motifs and also in the interhelical loops. We further observe that the exchange-competent states of amide hydrogens occur on the sub 100 ps time-scale via localized fluctuations, and such states among amides of a given protein do not appear to show any cooperativity or allosteric coupling.

Indexed as

AmidesAmino Acid SequenceAnimalsDeuteriumHumansModels, ChemicalMolecular Dynamics SimulationMolecular StructureRatsRGS ProteinsSequence AlignmentAmidesDeuteriumregulator of G-protein signalling 19RGS4 proteinRGS8 protein, humanRGS Proteins

Identifiers

PMID30222348
PMCPMC6430106
OpenAlexW2892126553

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.