ArticleBiophysical journal2025
Thermodynamics of arginine interactions with organic phosphates.
Article in Biophysical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- FeSseqdb: a curated sequence-level database and interpretable machine learning framework for identifying iron-sulfur proteins.BMC bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Multiscale Analysis of PNPLA2 and PNPLA3 Membrane Targeting.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- HInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The thermodynamics of arginine-phosphate binding is key to cellular signaling, protein-nucleic acid interactions, and membrane protein dynamics. In biomolecules, monoester phosphates are typically employed as strong electrostatic anchors strategically placed in switch domains to mediate specific interactions. In the diester configuration, phosphate groups act as ubiquitous connectors in all nucleic acids and polar lipids, while also engaging in less specific but multiple electrostatic interactions. Here, we employ isothermal titration calorimetry and a set of small-molecule models and peptides to benchmark the ability of the CHARMM force field to accurately reproduce these interactions. We observe good agreement between isothermal titration calorimetry and computational results for methylguanidinium (MGUA) with glycerol and glucose phosphates (MGUA-Gly3P, MGUA-Glu6P), and for arginine-glycine-arginine peptide with inositol triphosphate (RGR-IP3) systems, with experimental binding energies of -3.30 ± 0.30, -3.89 ± 0.30, and -8.96 ± 0.17 kcal/mol, compared with computational values of -4.08 ± 0.00, -4.20 ± 0.00, and -9.17 ± 0.20 kcal/mol, respectively. However, the experimental binding energy of -2.24 ± 0.71 kcal/mol between MGUA and dimethylphosphate in a diester configuration was significantly underestimated in CHARMM computations (-0.51 ± 0.01 kcal/mol). The force field was, therefore, refined by reducing the Lennard-Jones R
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.