MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039171043 · doi:10.1021/acs.biochem.5b00215

Challenges in the Interpretation of Protein H/D Exchange Data: A Molecular Dynamics Simulation Perspective

2015· article· en· W2039171043 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert G. McAllister, Lars Konermann

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Structure and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSolvationIntramolecular forceMolecular dynamicsChemistryHydrogen bondAmideUbiquitinComputational chemistrySolventChemical physicsMoleculeStereochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistrySame topicProtein Structure and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207