1996
DOI: 10.1016/s0079-6123(08)62095-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Chapter 11 3-Heteroarylquinuclidin-2-ene derivatives as muscarinic antagonists: synthesis, structure-activity relationships and molecular modelling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 8 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, all the intermolecular interaction models reported so far were achieved following either manual or automatic docking of the ligand into the putative binding site of the target receptor model. Given the enormous number of reports on the matter, we prefer to broadly classify and quote them according to the approach used to bundle the TM helices, i.e., (a) by ab initio approaches strongly based on the 2D electron density maps of rhodopsin 321,329,[482][483][484] or on the integration between 2D and 3D electron density maps of rhodopsin and inferences of Baldwin's analysis 60,83,238,240-244,246-248,250,255,258,260,262-267,269-278,280-292, 298-301,303 or (b) by comparative modeling, employing either BRD 160,161,163,[165][166][167][168][192][193][194]197,198,[200][201][202]204,205,209,210,441,[485][486][487][488][489][490][491] or ab initio models of rhodopsin, [311][312][313]325 or, since very recently, the crystal structure of bovine rhodopsin as a template. 68,71,141,324,…”
Section: Computational Modeling Of Ligand−receptor Interactionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, all the intermolecular interaction models reported so far were achieved following either manual or automatic docking of the ligand into the putative binding site of the target receptor model. Given the enormous number of reports on the matter, we prefer to broadly classify and quote them according to the approach used to bundle the TM helices, i.e., (a) by ab initio approaches strongly based on the 2D electron density maps of rhodopsin 321,329,[482][483][484] or on the integration between 2D and 3D electron density maps of rhodopsin and inferences of Baldwin's analysis 60,83,238,240-244,246-248,250,255,258,260,262-267,269-278,280-292, 298-301,303 or (b) by comparative modeling, employing either BRD 160,161,163,[165][166][167][168][192][193][194]197,198,[200][201][202]204,205,209,210,441,[485][486][487][488][489][490][491] or ab initio models of rhodopsin, [311][312][313]325 or, since very recently, the crystal structure of bovine rhodopsin as a template. 68,71,141,324,…”
Section: Computational Modeling Of Ligand−receptor Interactionsmentioning
confidence: 99%