de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean
English
 
Help Guide Disclaimer Contact us Login
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Error distribution derived NOE distance restraints

MPS-Authors
http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons83949

Habeck,  M
Department Empirical Inference, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

Locator
There are no locators available
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts available
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Nilges, M., Habeck, M., Zdravkovi&#263, Si, & Rieping, W. (2006). Error distribution derived NOE distance restraints. Proteins, 64(3), 652-664. doi:10.1002/prot.20985.


Cite as: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-D0D1-0
Abstract
Errors and imprecisions in distance restraints derived from NOESY peak volumes are usually accounted for by generous lower and upper bounds on the distances. In this paper, we propose a new form of distance restraints, replacing the subjective bounds by a potential function obtained from the error distribution of the distances. We derived the shape of the potential from molecular dynamics calculations and by comparison of NMR data with X-ray crystal structures. We used complete cross-validation to derive the optimal weight for the data in the calculation. In a model system with synthetic restraints, the accuracy of the structures improved significantly compared to calculations with the usual form of restraints. For experimental data sets, the structures systematically approach the X-ray crystal structures of the same protein. Also standard quality indicators improve compared to standard calculations. The results did not depend critically on the exact shape of the potential. The new approach is less subjective and uses fewer assumptions in the interpretation of NOESY peak volumes as distance restraints than the usual approach. Figures of merit for the structures, such as the RMS difference from the average structure or the RMS difference from the data, are therefore less biased and more meaningful measures of structure quality than with the usual form of restraints.