ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2023
De novo protein fold design through sequence-independent fragment assembly simulations.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- How far can you go? Extrapolating values of catalytic activity from known protein landscapes in natural and directed evolution.Chemical Society reviews · 2026Review
- Review
- Evolution-guided design of mini-protein for high-contrastActa pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2025Article
- AI Prediction of Structural Stability of Nanoproteins Based on Structures and Residue Properties by Mean Pooled Dual Graph Convolutional Network.Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences · 2025Article
- MoDAFold: a strategy for predicting the structure of missense mutant protein based on AlphaFold2 and molecular dynamics.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Review
- Sticking to the Subject: Multifunctionality in Microbial Adhesins.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
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
De novo protein design generally consists of two steps, including structure and sequence design. Many protein design studies have focused on sequence design with scaffolds adapted from native structures in the PDB, which renders novel areas of protein structure and function space unexplored. We developed FoldDesign to create novel protein folds from specific secondary structure (SS) assignments through sequence-independent replica-exchange Monte Carlo (REMC) simulations. The method was tested on 354 non-redundant topologies, where FoldDesign consistently created stable structural folds, while recapitulating on average 87.7% of the SS elements. Meanwhile, the FoldDesign scaffolds had well-formed structures with buried residues and solvent-exposed areas closely matching their native counterparts. Despite the high fidelity to the input SS restraints and local structural characteristics of native proteins, a large portion of the designed scaffolds possessed global folds completely different from natural proteins in the PDB, highlighting the ability of FoldDesign to explore novel areas of protein fold space. Detailed data analyses revealed that the major contributions to the successful structure design lay in the optimal energy force field, which contains a balanced set of SS packing terms, and REMC simulations, which were coupled with multiple auxiliary movements to efficiently search the conformational space. Additionally, the ability to recognize and assemble uncommon super-SS geometries, rather than the unique arrangement of common SS motifs, was the key to generating novel folds. These results demonstrate a strong potential to explore both structural and functional spaces through computational design simulations that natural proteins have not reached through evolution.
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.