2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.biochi.2019.07.025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

In silico prediction of protein flexibility with local structure approach

Abstract: Flexibility is an intrinsic essential feature of protein structures, directly linked to their functions. To this day, most of the prediction methods use the crystallographic data (namely B-factors) as the only indicator of protein's inner flexibility and predicts them as rigid or flexible. PredyFlexy stands differently from other approaches as it relies on the definition of protein flexibility (i) not only taken from crystallographic data, but also (ii) from Root Mean Square Fluctuation (RMSFs) observed in Mol… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The first region is 11 residues long (positions 763–775) whereas the second one is 34 residues long (positions 840–873). The second region is long enough to be beyond the scope of default loop-modelling algorithms [ 21 ], with no repetitive secondary structure [ 22 , 23 ] and high flexibility content [ 24 , 25 , 26 ]. To expertly model these, sequence homologs were mined using PSI-BLAST [ 27 ] and structurally similar molecules were identified using the FATCAT algorithm (Flexible structure AlignmenT by Chaining Aligned fragment pairs allowing Twists) [ 28 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first region is 11 residues long (positions 763–775) whereas the second one is 34 residues long (positions 840–873). The second region is long enough to be beyond the scope of default loop-modelling algorithms [ 21 ], with no repetitive secondary structure [ 22 , 23 ] and high flexibility content [ 24 , 25 , 26 ]. To expertly model these, sequence homologs were mined using PSI-BLAST [ 27 ] and structurally similar molecules were identified using the FATCAT algorithm (Flexible structure AlignmenT by Chaining Aligned fragment pairs allowing Twists) [ 28 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Analysis of RMSF (see Figures 2B, 3B and S3B) shows high values in RMSF in the CDRs (63)(64)(65)(66)(67)(68)(69)(70)(71)(72)(73)(74). Interestingly, the FR2 region (46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52) and FR3 (77-79 and 89-95) are also associated with high values. At first glance, the whole of FR2 (18 residues) is highly flexible except for two regions between 44-47 and 55-63.…”
Section: Flexibility At Each Residue Positionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…It describes more precisely the local conformation [44]. The PB alignment shown in Figure 1C represents the corresponding PB assignment at each residue position of a given V H H domain aligned according to the MSA, where 10-20% diversity is observed in FR1 (positions 3-25), FR2 (45)(46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55)(56)(57)(58)(59)(60)(61)(62) and FR3 (77-113) regions, especially in the loop between the β-stands (represented by the Protein Block d). The PB analysis shows no residue is associated with the coil state.…”
Section: Dataset Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They can be divided into two main types: prediction of residue flexibility and prediction of a protein's structural ensemble. Individual residue flexibility can be predicted using many techniques including information from crystallographic B-factors (Schlessinger and Rost, 2005), normal mode analysis (NMA) (Jacobs et al, 2001), NMR chemical shift data (Cilia et al, 2014) and Molecular Dynamics (MD) simulation data (Narwani et al, 2019). While some of these methods can predict residue flexibility from sequence alone, the predictions contain no information about different distinct conformations of a protein.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%