Literature DB >> 31872764

Using NMR Chemical Shifts and Cryo-EM Density Restraints in Iterative Rosetta-MD Protein Structure Refinement.

Sumudu P Leelananda1, Steffen Lindert1.   

Abstract

Cryo-EM has become one of the prime methods for protein structure elucidation, frequently yielding density maps with near-atomic or medium resolution. If protein structures cannot be deduced unambiguously from the density maps, computational structure refinement tools are needed to generate protein structural models. We have previously developed an iterative Rosetta-MDFF protocol that used cryo-EM densities to refine protein structures. Here we show that, in addition to cryo-EM densities, incorporation of other experimental restraints into the Rosetta-MDFF protocol further improved refined structures. We used NMR chemical shift (CS) data integrated with cryo-EM densities in our hybrid protocol in both the Rosetta step and the molecular dynamics (MD) simulations step. In 15 out of 18 cases for all MD rounds, the refinement results obtained when density maps and NMR chemical shift data were used in combination outperformed those of density map-only refinement. Notably, the improvement in refinement was highest when medium and low-resolution density maps were used. With our hybrid method, the RMSDs of final models obtained were always better than the RMSDs obtained by our previous protocol with just density refinement for both medium (6.9 Å) and low (9 Å) resolution maps. For all the six test proteins with medium resolution density maps (6.9 Å), the final refined structure RMSDs were lower for the hybrid method than for the cryo-EM only refinement. The final refined RMSDs were less than 1.5 Å when our hybrid protocol was used with 4 Å density maps. For four out of the six proteins the final RMSDs were even less than 1 Å. This study demonstrates that by using a combination of cryo-EM and NMR restraints, it is possible to refine structures to atomic resolution, outperforming single restraint refinement. This hybrid protocol will be a valuable tool when only low-resolution cryo-EM density data and NMR chemical shift data are available to refine structures.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31872764      PMCID: PMC7262651          DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.9b00932

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chem Inf Model        ISSN: 1549-9596            Impact factor:   4.956


  68 in total

1.  Protein structure prediction using Rosetta.

Authors:  Carol A Rohl; Charlie E M Strauss; Kira M S Misura; David Baker
Journal:  Methods Enzymol       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 1.600

2.  De novo high-resolution protein structure determination from sparse spin-labeling EPR data.

Authors:  Nathan Alexander; Marco Bortolus; Ahmad Al-Mestarihi; Hassane Mchaourab; Jens Meiler
Journal:  Structure       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 5.006

3.  Relative interfacial cleavage energetics of protein complexes revealed by surface collisions.

Authors:  Sophie R Harvey; Justin T Seffernick; Royston S Quintyn; Yang Song; Yue Ju; Jing Yan; Aniruddha N Sahasrabuddhe; Andrew Norris; Mowei Zhou; Edward J Behrman; Steffen Lindert; Vicki H Wysocki
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-04-03       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Refinement of protein structures into low-resolution density maps using rosetta.

Authors:  Frank DiMaio; Michael D Tyka; Matthew L Baker; Wah Chiu; David Baker
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2009-07-08       Impact factor: 5.469

5.  Advances in the molecular dynamics flexible fitting method for cryo-EM modeling.

Authors:  Ryan McGreevy; Ivan Teo; Abhishek Singharoy; Klaus Schulten
Journal:  Methods       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 3.608

6.  ROSETTA3: an object-oriented software suite for the simulation and design of macromolecules.

Authors:  Andrew Leaver-Fay; Michael Tyka; Steven M Lewis; Oliver F Lange; James Thompson; Ron Jacak; Kristian Kaufman; P Douglas Renfrew; Colin A Smith; Will Sheffler; Ian W Davis; Seth Cooper; Adrien Treuille; Daniel J Mandell; Florian Richter; Yih-En Andrew Ban; Sarel J Fleishman; Jacob E Corn; David E Kim; Sergey Lyskov; Monica Berrondo; Stuart Mentzer; Zoran Popović; James J Havranek; John Karanicolas; Rhiju Das; Jens Meiler; Tanja Kortemme; Jeffrey J Gray; Brian Kuhlman; David Baker; Philip Bradley
Journal:  Methods Enzymol       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.600

7.  Structure prediction using sparse simulated NOE restraints with Rosetta in CASP11.

Authors:  Sergey Ovchinnikov; Hahnbeom Park; David E Kim; Yuan Liu; Ray Yu-Ruei Wang; David Baker
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2016-03-06

Review 8.  Computational methods in drug discovery.

Authors:  Sumudu P Leelananda; Steffen Lindert
Journal:  Beilstein J Org Chem       Date:  2016-12-12       Impact factor: 2.883

9.  Overview of refinement procedures within REFMAC5: utilizing data from different sources.

Authors:  Oleg Kovalevskiy; Robert A Nicholls; Fei Long; Azzurra Carlon; Garib N Murshudov
Journal:  Acta Crystallogr D Struct Biol       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 7.652

10.  RosettaES: a sampling strategy enabling automated interpretation of difficult cryo-EM maps.

Authors:  Brandon Frenz; Alexandra C Walls; Edward H Egelman; David Veesler; Frank DiMaio
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 47.990

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Hybrid methods for combined experimental and computational determination of protein structure.

Authors:  Justin T Seffernick; Steffen Lindert
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2020-12-28       Impact factor: 3.488

2.  Practical Considerations for Atomistic Structure Modeling with Cryo-EM Maps.

Authors:  Doo Nam Kim; Dominik Gront; Karissa Y Sanbonmatsu
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2020-05-18       Impact factor: 4.956

3.  Faces of Contemporary CryoEM Information and Modeling.

Authors:  Giulia Palermo; Yuji Sugita; Willy Wriggers; Rommie E Amaro
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 4.956

4.  CryoFold: determining protein structures and data-guided ensembles from cryo-EM density maps.

Authors:  Mrinal Shekhar; Genki Terashi; Chitrak Gupta; Daipayan Sarkar; Gaspard Debussche; Nicholas J Sisco; Jonathan Nguyen; Arup Mondal; John Vant; Petra Fromme; Wade D Van Horn; Emad Tajkhorshid; Daisuke Kihara; Ken Dill; Alberto Perez; Abhishek Singharoy
Journal:  Matter       Date:  2021-09-22

5.  Using Open Data to Rapidly Benchmark Biomolecular Simulations: Phospholipid Conformational Dynamics.

Authors:  Hanne S Antila; Tiago M Ferreira; O H Samuli Ollila; Markus S Miettinen
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2021-01-26       Impact factor: 4.956

6.  Database Independent Automated Structure Elucidation of Organic Molecules Based on IR, 1H NMR, 13C NMR, and MS Data.

Authors:  Matevž Pesek; Andraž Juvan; Jure Jakoš; Janez Košmrlj; Matija Marolt; Martin Gazvoda
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2020-12-30       Impact factor: 4.956

7.  State-dependent sequential allostery exhibited by chaperonin TRiC/CCT revealed by network analysis of Cryo-EM maps.

Authors:  Yan Zhang; James Krieger; Karolina Mikulska-Ruminska; Burak Kaynak; Carlos Oscar S Sorzano; José-María Carazo; Jianhua Xing; Ivet Bahar
Journal:  Prog Biophys Mol Biol       Date:  2020-08-28       Impact factor: 3.667

8.  Protein shape sampled by ion mobility mass spectrometry consistently improves protein structure prediction.

Authors:  S M Bargeen Alam Turzo; Justin T Seffernick; Amber D Rolland; Micah T Donor; Sten Heinze; James S Prell; Vicki H Wysocki; Steffen Lindert
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-07-28       Impact factor: 17.694

9.  Utilization of Hydrophobic Microenvironment Sensitivity in Diethylpyrocarbonate Labeling for Protein Structure Prediction.

Authors:  Sarah E Biehn; Patanachai Limpikirati; Richard W Vachet; Steffen Lindert
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 8.008

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.