Challenges in the Interpretation of Protein H/D Exchange Data: A Molecular Dynamics Simulation Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many protein structural investigations involve the use of H/D exchange (HDX) techniques. It is commonly thought that amide backbone protection arises from intramolecular H-bonding and/or burial of NH sites. Recently, fundamental HDX-related tenets have been called into question. The current work focuses on ubiquitin for exploring the defining features that distinguish amides in "open" (exchange-competent) and "closed" (exchange-incompetent) environments. Instead of relying on static X-ray structures, we employ all-atom molecular dynamics (MD) simulations for obtaining a dynamic view of the protein ground state and its surrounding solvent. The HDX properties for 57 out of 72 NH sites can be readily explained on the basis of backbone and side chain H-bonding, as well as solvent accessibility considerations. Unexpectedly, the same criteria fail for predicting the HDX characteristics of the remaining 15 amides. Significant protection is seen for numerous exposed NH sites that are not engaged in intramolecular H-bonds, whereas other amides that seemingly share the same features are unprotected. We scrutinize the proposal that H-bonding to crystallographically defined water can cause the protection of surface amides. For ubiquitin, the positioning of crystal water is not compatible with this idea. To further explore possible solvation effects, we tested for the presence of partially immobilized water networks. Our MD data reveal no difference in the solvation properties of protected vs unprotected surface amides, making it unlikely that restricted water dynamics can cause anomalous amide protection. The findings reported here suggest that efforts to deduce protein structural features on the basis of HDX protection factors may yield misleading results. This conclusion is relevant for initiatives that rely on sparse structural data as constraints for elucidating protein conformations. It may be necessary to pursue detailed quantum mechanical studies of the protein, the solvent, and the hydroxide catalyst for obtaining a comprehensive understanding of the factors that govern HDX rates. The considerable size of the systems involved makes such endeavors a daunting task.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".