Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32093835›Full record

ArticleMethods in enzymology2020

What are the current limits on determination of protonation state using neutron macromolecular crystallography?

Dorothee Liebschner, Pavel V Afonine, Nigel W Moriarty, Paul D Adams

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Methods in enzymology, 2020. 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, top 97% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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.

Dorothee LiebschnerMolecular Biophysics and Integrated Bioimaging Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Berkeley, CA, United States. Electronic address: dcliebschner@lbl.gov.
Pavel V AfonineMolecular Biophysics and Integrated Bioimaging Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Berkeley, CA, United States.
Nigel W MoriartyMolecular Biophysics and Integrated Bioimaging Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Berkeley, CA, United States.
Paul D AdamsMolecular Biophysics and Integrated Bioimaging Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Berkeley, CA, United States; Department of Bioengineering, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory · USUniversity of California, Berkeley · US

Funding

PROJECT 5 - DUKE - STRUCTURE VALIDATION AND IMPROVEMENT FOR PROTEINS AND N. ACIDSP01GM063210 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIF-LAWRENC BERKELEY LAB · PI ADAMS, PAUL DAVID · 2001 to 2021
$33.5M
Computational Tools for Neutron Protein CrystallographyR01GM071939 · NIGMS · UT-BATTELLE, LLC-OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LAB · PI COATES, LEIGHTON · 2004 to 2019
$4.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS P01 GM063210NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM071939
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rate of deposition of models determined by neutron diffraction, or a hybrid approach that combines X-ray and neutron diffraction, has increased in recent years. The benefit of neutron diffraction is that hydrogen atom (H) positions are detectable, allowing for the determination of protonation state and water molecule orientation. This study analyses all neutron models deposited in the Protein Data Bank to date, focusing on protonation state and properties of H (or deuterium, D) atoms as well as the details of water molecules. In particular, clashes and hydrogen bonds involving H or D atoms are investigated. As water molecules are typically the least reproducible part of a structural model, their positions in neutron models were compared to those in homologous high-resolution X-ray structures. For models determined by joint refinement against X-ray and neutron data, the water structure comparison was also carried out for models re-refined against the X-ray data alone. The homologues have generally fewer conserved water molecules where X-ray only was used and the positions of equivalent waters vary more than in the case of the hybrid X-ray model. As neutron diffraction data are generally less complete than X-ray data, the influence of neutron data completeness on nuclear density maps was also analyzed. We observe and discuss systematic map quality deterioration as result of data incompleteness.

Indexed as

Neutron DiffractionNeutronsCrystallographyCrystallography, X-RayHydrogen BondingModels, MolecularHydrogen bondNeutron diffractionProtonation stateWater structure

Identifiers

PMID32093835
PMCPMC7571246
OpenAlexW3005565812

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.