Ensemble MD simulations restrained via crystallographic data: Accurate structure leads to accurate dynamics
dc.contributor.author | Xue, Yi | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Skrynnikov, Nikolai R. | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2014-05-21T18:02:58Z | |
dc.date.available | WITHHELD_13_MONTHS | en_US |
dc.date.available | 2014-05-21T18:02:58Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2014-04 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Xue, Yi; Skrynnikov, Nikolai R. (2014). "Ensemble MD simulations restrained via crystallographic data: Accurate structure leads to accurate dynamics." Protein Science 23(4): 488-507. | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0961-8368 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1469-896X | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/106717 | |
dc.description.abstract | Currently, the best existing molecular dynamics (MD) force fields cannot accurately reproduce the global free‐energy minimum which realizes the experimental protein structure. As a result, long MD trajectories tend to drift away from the starting coordinates (e.g., crystallographic structures). To address this problem, we have devised a new simulation strategy aimed at protein crystals. An MD simulation of protein crystal is essentially an ensemble simulation involving multiple protein molecules in a crystal unit cell (or a block of unit cells). To ensure that average protein coordinates remain correct during the simulation, we introduced crystallography‐based restraints into the MD protocol. Because these restraints are aimed at the ensemble‐average structure, they have only minimal impact on conformational dynamics of the individual protein molecules. So long as the average structure remains reasonable, the proteins move in a native‐like fashion as dictated by the original force field. To validate this approach, we have used the data from solid‐state NMR spectroscopy, which is the orthogonal experimental technique uniquely sensitive to protein local dynamics. The new method has been tested on the well‐established model protein, ubiquitin. The ensemble‐restrained MD simulations produced lower crystallographic R factors than conventional simulations; they also led to more accurate predictions for crystallographic temperature factors, solid‐state chemical shifts, and backbone order parameters. The predictions for 15 N R 1 relaxation rates are at least as accurate as those obtained from conventional simulations. Taken together, these results suggest that the presented trajectories may be among the most realistic protein MD simulations ever reported. In this context, the ensemble restraints based on high‐resolution crystallographic data can be viewed as protein‐specific empirical corrections to the standard force fields. | en_US |
dc.publisher | Wiley Periodicals, Inc. | en_US |
dc.publisher | Oxford University Press | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Crystallographic R Factors | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Crystallographic B Factors | en_US |
dc.subject.other | 15 N Relaxation | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Ubiquitin | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Order Parameters | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Protein Structure and Dynamics | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Molecular Dynamics Simulations | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Force Fields | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Solid‐State NMR | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Protein Crystallography | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Chemical Shifts | en_US |
dc.title | Ensemble MD simulations restrained via crystallographic data: Accurate structure leads to accurate dynamics | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.rights.robots | IndexNoFollow | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Biological Chemistry | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Health Sciences | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/106717/1/pro2433.pdf | |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/106717/2/pro2433-sup-0001-suppinfo.pdf | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1002/pro.2433 | en_US |
dc.identifier.source | Protein Science | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Long D, Bruschweiler R ( 2011 ) In silico elucidation of the recognition dynamics of ubiquitin. PLoS Comput Biol 7: e1002035. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Kim YM, Prestegard JH ( 1990 ) Refinement of the NMR structures for Acyl Carrier Protein with scalar coupling data. Proteins 8: 377 – 385. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Bonvin AMJJ, Boelens R, Kaptein R ( 1994 ) Time and ensemble‐averaged direct NOE restraints. J Biomol NMR 4: 143 – 149. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Clore GM, Schwieters CD ( 2004 ) How much backbone motion in ubiquitin is required to account for dipolar coupling data measured in multiple alignment media as assessed by independent cross‐validation? J Am Chem Soc 126: 2923 – 2938. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Tang C, Schwieters CD, Clore GM ( 2007 ) Open‐to‐closed transition in apo maltose‐binding protein observed by paramagnetic NMR. Nature 449: 1078 – 1082. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lindorff‐Larsen K, Best RB, DePristo MA, Dobson CM, Vendruscolo M ( 2005 ) Simultaneous determination of protein structure and dynamics. Nature 433: 128 – 132. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Allison JR, Varnai P, Dobson CM, Vendruscolo M ( 2009 ) Determination of the free energy landscape of α‐synuclein using spin label nuclear magnetic resonance measurements. J Am Chem Soc 131: 18314 – 18326. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Huang JR, Grzesiek S ( 2010 ) Ensemble calculations of unstructured proteins constrained by RDC and PRE data: a case study of urea‐denatured ubiquitin. J Am Chem Soc 132: 694 – 705. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Robustelli P, Kohlhoff K, Cavalli A, Vendruscolo M ( 2010 ) Using NMR chemical shifts as structural restraints in molecular dynamics simulations of proteins. Structure 18: 923 – 933. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Esteban‐Martin S, Fenwick RB, Salvatella X ( 2010 ) Refinement of ensembles describing unstructured proteins using NMR residual dipolar couplings. J Am Chem Soc 132: 4626 – 4632. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Im W, Jo S, Kim T ( 2012 ) An ensemble dynamics approach to decipher solid‐state NMR observables of membrane proteins. BBA Biomembr 1818: 252 – 262. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Kuriyan J, Osapay K, Burley SK, Brunger AT, Hendrickson WA, Karplus M ( 1991 ) Exploration of disorder in protein structures by X‐ray restrained molecular dynamics. Proteins 10: 340 – 358. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Burling FT, Brunger AT ( 1994 ) Thermal motion and conformational disorder in protein crystal structures: comparison of multi‐conformer and time‐averaging models. Israel J Chem 34: 165 – 175. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Gros P, Van Gunsteren WF, Hol WGJ ( 1990 ) Inclusion of thermal motion in crystallographic structure by restrained Molecular Dynamics. Science 249: 1149 – 1152. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Clarage JB, Phillips GN ( 1994 ) Cross‐validation tests of time‐averaged molecular dynamics refinements for determination of protein structures by X‐ray crystallography. Acta Crystallogr Sect D: Biol Crystallogr 50: 24 – 36. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Pellegrini M, Gronbech‐Jensen N, Kelly JA, Pfluegl GMU, Yeates TO ( 1997 ) Highly constrained multiple‐copy refinement of protein crystal structures. Proteins 29: 426 – 432. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Levin EJ, Kondrashov DA, Wesenberg GE, Phillips GN ( 2007 ) Ensemble refinement of protein crystal structures: validation and application. Structure 15: 1040 – 1052. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Burnley BT, Afonine PV, Adams PD, Gros P ( 2012 ) Modelling dynamics in protein crystal structures by ensemble refinement. eLife Sci 1: e00311. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Doreleijers JF, Rullmann JAC, Kaptein R ( 1998 ) Quality assessment of NMR structures: a statistical survey. J Mol Biol 281: 149 – 164. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Garbuzynskiy SO, Melnik BS, Lobanov MY, Finkelstein AV, Galzitskaya OV ( 2005 ) Comparison of X‐ray and NMR structures: is there a systematic difference in residue contacts between X‐ray and NMR‐resolved protein structures? Proteins 60: 139 – 147. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Andrec M, Snyder DA, Zhou ZY, Young J, Montellone GT, Levy RM ( 2007 ) A large data set comparison of protein structures determined by crystallography and NMR: statistical test for structural differences and the effect of crystal packing. Proteins 69: 449 – 465. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Williamson MP, Kikuchi J, Asakura T ( 1995 ) Application of 1 H NMR chemical shifts to measure the quality of protein structures. J Mol Biol 247: 541 – 546. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Neal S, Nip AM, Zhang HY, Wishart DS ( 2003 ) Rapid and accurate calculation of protein 1 H, 13 C, and 15 N chemical shifts. J Biomol NMR 26: 215 – 240. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Spronk C, Nabuurs SB, Krieger E, Vriend G, Vuister GW ( 2004 ) Validation of protein structures derived by NMR spectroscopy. Prog NMR Spectrosc 45: 315 – 337. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Bax A ( 2003 ) Weak alignment offers new NMR opportunities to study protein structure and dynamics. Protein Sci 12: 1 – 16. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Simon K, Xu J, Kim C, Skrynnikov NR ( 2005 ) Estimating the accuracy of protein structures using residual dipolar couplings. J Biomol NMR 33: 83 – 93. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Krieger E, Darden T, Nabuurs SB, Finkelstein A, Vriend G ( 2004 ) Making optimal use of empirical energy functions: force‐field parameterization in crystal space. Proteins 57: 678 – 683. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Raval A, Piana S, Eastwood MP, Dror RO, Shaw DE ( 2012 ) Refinement of protein structure homology models via long, all‐atom molecular dynamics simulations. Proteins 80: 2071 – 2079. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lee MR, Baker D, Kollman PA ( 2001 ) 2.1 and 1.8 angstrom average C α RMSD structure predictions on two small proteins, HP‐36 and S15. J Am Chem Soc 123: 1040 – 1046. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Fan H, Mark AE ( 2004 ) Refinement of homology‐based protein structures by molecular dynamics simulation techniques. Protein Sci 13: 211 – 220. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lindorff‐Larsen K, Piana S, Dror RO, Shaw DE ( 2011 ) How fast‐folding proteins fold. Science 334: 517 – 520. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lee MR, Tsai J, Baker D, Kollman PA ( 2001 ) Molecular dynamics in the endgame of protein structure prediction. J Mol Biol 313: 417 – 430. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Chen JH, Brooks CL ( 2007 ) Can molecular dynamics simulations provide high‐resolution refinement of protein structure? Proteins 67: 922 – 930. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Chopra G, Summa CM, Levitt M ( 2008 ) Solvent dramatically affects protein structure refinement. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105: 20239 – 20244. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | MacCallum JL, Hua L, Schnieders MJ, Pande VS, Jacobson MP, Dill KA ( 2009 ) Assessment of the protein‐structure refinement category in CASP8. Proteins 77: 66 – 80. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | MacCallum JL, Perez A, Schnieders MJ, Hua L, Jacobson MP, Dill KA ( 2011 ) Assessment of protein structure refinement in CASP9. Proteins 79: 74 – 90. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Ponder JW, Wu CJ, Ren PY, Pande VS, Chodera JD, Schnieders MJ, Haque I, Mobley DL, Lambrecht DS, DiStasio RA, Head‐Gordon M, Clark GNI, Johnson ME, Head‐Gordon T ( 2010 ) Current status of the AMOEBA polarizable force field. J Phys Chem B 114: 2549 – 2564. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Mackerell AD, Feig M, Brooks CL ( 2004 ) Extending the treatment of backbone energetics in protein force fields: limitations of gas‐phase quantum mechanics in reproducing protein conformational distributions in molecular dynamics simulations. J Comput Chem 25: 1400 – 1415. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Best RB & Hummer G ( 2009 ) Optimized molecular dynamics force fields applied to the helix‐coil transition of polypeptides. J Phys Chem B 113: 9004 – 9015. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Li DW, Brüschweiler R ( 2010 ) NMR‐based protein potentials. Angew Chem Int Ed 49: 6778 – 6780. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Stocker U, Spiegel K, van Gunsteren WF ( 2000 ) On the similarity of properties in solution or in the crystalline state: a molecular dynamics study of hen lysozyme. J Biomol NMR 18: 1 – 12. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Meinhold L, Smith JC ( 2005 ) Fluctuations and correlations in crystalline protein dynamics: a simulation analysis of Staphylococcal nuclease. Biophys J 88: 2554 – 2563. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Cerutti DS, Freddolino PL, Duke RE, Case DA ( 2010 ) Simulations of a protein crystal with a high resolution X‐ray structure: evaluation of force fields and water models. J Phys Chem B 114: 12811 – 12824. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Chevelkov V, Xue Y, Linser R, Skrynnikov NR, Reif B ( 2010 ) Comparison of solid‐state dipolar couplings and solution relaxation data provides insight into protein backbone dynamics. J Am Chem Soc 132: 5015 – 5017. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Mollica L, Baias M, Lewandowski JR, Wylie BJ, Sperling LJ, Rienstra CM, Emsley JW, Blackledge M ( 2012 ) Atomic‐resolution structural dynamics in crystalline proteins from NMR and Molecular Simulation. J Phys Chem Lett 3: 3657−3662. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Martin RW, Zilm KW ( 2003 ) Preparation of protein nanocrystals and their characterization by solid state NMR. J Magn Reson 165: 162 – 174. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Igumenova TI, Wand AJ, McDermott AE ( 2004 ) Assignment of the backbone resonances for microcrystalline ubiquitin. J Am Chem Soc 126: 5323 – 5331. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lorieau JL, McDermott AE ( 2006 ) Conformational flexibility of a microcrystalline globular protein: order parameters by solid‐state NMR spectroscopy. J Am Chem Soc 128: 11505 – 11512. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Manolikas T, Herrmann T, Meier BH ( 2008 ) Protein structure determination from 13 C spin‐diffusion solid‐state NMR spectroscopy. J Am Chem Soc 130: 3959 – 3966. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Schanda P, Meier BH, Ernst M ( 2010 ) Quantitative analysis of protein backbone dynamics in microcrystalline ubiquitin by solid‐state NMR spectroscopy. J Am Chem Soc 132: 15957 – 15967. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Tollinger M, Sivertsen AC, Meier BH, Ernst M, Schanda P ( 2012 ) Site‐resolved measurement of microsecond‐to‐millisecond conformational exchange processes in proteins by solid‐state NMR spectroscopy. J Am Chem Soc 134: 14800 – 14807. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Huang KY, Amodeo GA, Tong LA, McDermott A ( 2011 ) The structure of human ubiquitin in 2‐methyl‐2,4‐pentanediol: a new conformational switch. Protein Sci 20: 630 – 639. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Kohn JE, Afonine PV, Ruscio JZ, Adams PD, Head‐Gordon T ( 2010 ) Evidence of functional protein dynamics from X‐ray crystallographic ensembles. PLoS Comput Biol 6: e1000911. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Juers DH & Matthews BW ( 2001 ) Reversible lattice repacking illustrates the temperature dependence of macromolecular interactions. J Mol Biol 311 ( 4 ): 851 – 862. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Radaelli PG ( 2011 ). Symmetry in crystallography: understanding the international tables, Oxford: Oxford University Press. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Piana S, Lindorff‐Larsen K, Shaw DE ( 2013 ) Atomic‐level description of ubiquitin folding. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110: 5915 – 5920. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Hornak V, Abel R, Okur A, Strockbine B, Roitberg A, Simmerling C ( 2006 ) Comparison of multiple Amber force fields and development of improved protein backbone parameters. Proteins 65: 712 – 725. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lindorff‐Larsen K, Piana S, Palmo K, Maragakis P, Klepeis JL, Dror RO, Shaw DE ( 2010 ) Improved side‐chain torsion potentials for the Amber ff99SB protein force field. Proteins 78: 1950 – 1958. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Bas DC, Rogers DM, Jensen JH ( 2008 ) Very fast prediction and rationalization of pKa values for protein‐ligand complexes. Proteins 73: 765 – 783. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Sundd M, Iverson N, Ibarra‐Molero B, Sanchez‐Ruiz JM, Robertson AD ( 2002 ) Electrostatic interactions in ubiquitin: stabilization of carboxylates by lysine amino groups. Biochemistry 41: 7586 – 7596. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Cerutti DS, Le Trong I, Stenkamp RE, Lybrand TP ( 2008 ) Simulations of a protein crystal: explicit treatment of crystallization conditions links theory and experiment in the streptavidin‐biotin complex. Biochemistry 47: 12065 – 12077. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Adams PD, Afonine PV, Bunkoczi G, Chen VB, Davis IW, Echols N, Headd JJ, Hung LW, Kapral GJ, Grosse‐Kunstleve RW, McCoy AJ, Moriarty NW, Oeffner R, Read RJ, Richardson DC, Richardson JS, Terwilliger TC, Zwart PH ( 2010 ) PHENIX: a comprehensive Python‐based system for macromolecular structure solution. Acta Crystallogr Sect D: Biol Crystallogr 66: 213 – 221. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Fokine A, Urzhumtsev A ( 2002 ) Flat bulk‐solvent model: obtaining optimal parameters. Acta Crystallogr Sect D: Biol Crystallogr 58: 1387 – 1392. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Afonine PV, Grosse‐Kunstleve RW, Adams PD ( 2005 ) A robust bulk‐solvent correction and anisotropic scaling procedure. Acta Crystallogr Sect D: Biol Crystallogr 61: 850 – 855. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Han B, Liu YF, Ginzinger SW, Wishart DS ( 2011 ) SHIFTX2: significantly improved protein chemical shift prediction. J Biomol NMR 50: 43 – 57. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Igumenova TI, McDermott AE, Zilm KW, Martin RW, Paulson EK, Wand AJ ( 2004 ) Assignments of carbon NMR resonances for microcrystalline ubiquitin. J Am Chem Soc 126: 6720 – 6727. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Brüschweiler R, Wright PE ( 1994 ) NMR order parameters of biomolecules: a new analytical representation and application to the Gaussian Axial Fluctuation model. J Am Chem Soc 116: 8426 – 8427. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Haller JD, Schanda P ( 2013 ) Amplitudes and time scales of picosecond‐to‐microsecond motion in proteins studied by solid‐state NMR: a critical evaluation of experimental approaches and application to crystalline ubiquitin. J Biomol NMR 57: 263 – 280. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Vijay‐Kumar S, Bugg CE, Cook WJ ( 1987 ) Structure of ubiquitin refined at 1.8 A resolution. J Mol Biol 194: 531 – 544. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Fenwick RB, Esteban‐Martin S, Richter B, Lee D, Walter KFA, Milovanovic D, Becker S, Lakomek NA, Griesinger C, Salvatella X ( 2011 ) Weak long‐range correlated motions in a surface patch of ubiquitin involved in molecular recognition. J Am Chem Soc 133: 10336 – 10339. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Vitkup D, Ringe D, Karplus M, Petsko GA ( 2002 ) Why protein R‐factors are so large: a self‐consistent analysis. Proteins 46: 345 – 354. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | DePristo MA, de Bakker PIW, Blundell TL ( 2004 ) Heterogeneity and inaccuracy in protein structures solved by X‐ray crystallography. Structure 12: 831 – 838. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Shirts MR, Pitera JW, Swope WC, Pande VS ( 2003 ) Extremely precise free energy calculations of amino acid side chain analogs: comparison of common molecular mechanics force fields for proteins. J Chem Phys 119: 5740 – 5761. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Seeliger D, de Groot BL ( 2010 ) Protein thermostability calculations using alchemical free energy simulations. Biophys J 98: 2309 – 2316. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Linge JP, Williams MA, Spronk CAEM, Bonvin AMJJ, Nilges M ( 2003 ) Refinement of protein structures in explicit solvent. Proteins 50: 496 – 506. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Halle B ( 2002 ) Flexibility and packing in proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99: 1274 – 1279. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Robustelli P, Stafford KA, Palmer AG ( 2012 ) Interpreting protein structural dynamics from NMR chemical shifts. J Am Chem Soc 134: 6365 – 6374. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Li DW, Brüschweiler R ( 2010 ) Certification of molecular dynamics trajectories with NMR chemical shifts. J Phys Chem Lett 1: 246 – 248. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lehtivarjo J, Tuppurainen K, Hassinen T, Laatikainen R, Perakyla M ( 2012 ) Combining NMR ensembles and molecular dynamics simulations provides more realistic models of protein structures in solution and leads to better chemical shift prediction. J Biomol NMR 52: 257 – 267. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Li DW, Brüschweiler R ( 2012 ) PPM: a side‐chain and backbone chemical shift predictor for the assessment of protein conformational ensembles. J Biomol NMR 54: 257 – 265. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lewandowski JR, Sein J, Blackledge M, Emsley L ( 2010 ) Anisotropic collective motion contributes to nuclear spin relaxation in crystalline proteins. J Am Chem Soc 132: 1246 – 1247. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Bremi T, Brüschweiler R ( 1997 ) Locally anisotropic internal polypeptide backbone dynamics by NMR relaxation. J Am Chem Soc 119: 6672 – 6673. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lange OF, Lakomek NA, Farès C, Schröder GF, Walter KFA, Becker S, Meiler J, Grubmüller H, Griesinger C, de Groot BL ( 2008 ) Recognition dynamics up to microseconds revealed from an RDC‐derived ubiquitin ensemble in solution. Science 320: 1471 – 1475. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Xue Y, Ward JM, Yuwen TR, Podkorytov IS, Skrynnikov NR ( 2012 ) Microsecond time‐scale conformational exchange in proteins: using long Molecular Dynamics trajectory to simulate NMR relaxation dispersion data. J Am Chem Soc 134: 2555 – 2562. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Massi F, Grey MJ, Palmer AG ( 2005 ) Microsecond timescale backbone conformational dynamics in ubiquitin studied with NMR R 1ρ relaxation experiments. Protein Sci 14: 735 – 742. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Sidhu A, Surolia A, Robertson AD, Sundd M ( 2011 ) A hydrogen bond regulates slow motions in ubiquitin by modulating a β‐turn flip. J Mol Biol 411: 1037 – 1048. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Garcia AE, Krumhansl JA, Frauenfelder H ( 1997 ) Variations on a theme by Debye and Waller: from simple crystals to proteins. Proteins 29: 153 – 160. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Kundu S, Melton JS, Sorensen DC, Phillips GN ( 2002 ) Dynamics of proteins in crystals: comparison of experiment with simple models. Biophys J 83: 723 – 732. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Poon BK, Chen XR, Lu MY, Vyas NK, Quiocho FA, Wang QH, Ma JP ( 2007 ) Normal mode refinement of anisotropic thermal parameters for a supramolecular complex at 3.42‐A crystallographic resolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104: 7869 – 7874. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Afonine PV, Urzhumtsev A, Grosse‐Kunstleve RW, Adams PD ( 2010 ) atomic displacement parameters (ADPs), their parameterization and refinement in PHENIX. Comput Crystallogr Newsletter 1: 24 – 31. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Merritt EA ( 2012 ) To B or not to B: a question of resolution? Acta Crystallogr Sect D: Biol Crystallogr 68: 468 – 477. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Chong SH, Joti Y, Kidera A, Go N, Ostermann A, Gassmann A, Parak F ( 2001 ) Dynamical transition of myoglobin in a crystal: comparative studies of X‐ray crystallography and Mossbauer spectroscopy. Eur Biophys J 30: 319 – 329. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Schmidt M, Achterhold K, Prusakov V, Parak FG ( 2009 ) Protein dynamics of a β‐sheet protein. Eur Biophys J 38: 687 – 700. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Tilton RF, Dewan JC, Petsko GA ( 1992 ) Effects of temperature on protein structure and dynamics: X‐ray crystallographic studies of the protein ribonuclease‐A at 9 different temperatures from 98 K to 320 K. Biochemistry 31: 2469 – 2481. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Teeter MM, Yamano A, Stec B, Mohanty U ( 2001 ) On the nature of a glassy state of matter in a hydrated protein: relation to protein function. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98: 11242 – 11247. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Joti Y, Nakasako M, Kidera A, Go N ( 2002 ) Nonlinear temperature dependence of the crystal structure of lysozyme: correlation between coordinate shifts and thermal factors. Acta Crystallogr Sect D: Biol Crystallogr 58: 1421 – 1432. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Chevelkov V, Faelber K, Diehl A, Heinemann U, Oschkinat H, Reif B ( 2005 ) Detection of dynamic water molecules in a microcrystalline sample of the SH3 domain of α‐spectrin by MAS solid‐state NMR. J Biomol NMR 31: 295 – 310. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Brzozowski AM, Dodson EJ, Dodson GG, Murshudov GN, Verma C, Turkenburg JP, de Bree FM, Dauter Z ( 2002 ) Structural origins of the functional divergence of human insulin‐like growth factor‐I and insulin. Biochemistry 41: 9389 – 9397. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Chevelkov V, Zhuravleva AV, Xue Y, Reif B, Skrynnikov NR ( 2007 ) Combined analysis of 15 N relaxation data from solid‐ and solution‐state NMR spectroscopy. J Am Chem Soc 129: 12594 – 12595. | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.