Volume 98, Issue 9, Pages (May 2010)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Michail Stamatakis, Nikos V. Mantzaris  Biophysical Journal 
Advertisements

Fabio Trovato, Edward P. O’Brien  Biophysical Journal 
Journal of Vision. 2016;16(15):21. doi: / Figure Legend:
Driving Forces for Transmembrane α-Helix Oligomerization
(Un)Folding Mechanisms of the FBP28 WW Domain in Explicit Solvent Revealed by Multiple Rare Event Simulation Methods  Jarek Juraszek, Peter G. Bolhuis 
Volume 106, Issue 6, Pages (March 2014)
Young Min Rhee, Vijay S. Pande  Biophysical Journal 
Role of Hydration Water in Protein Unfolding
Numerical Study of the Entropy Loss of Dimerization and the Folding Thermodynamics of the GCN4 Leucine Zipper  Jorge Viñals, Andrzej Kolinski, Jeffrey.
Volume 99, Issue 10, Pages (November 2010)
Folding Pathways of Prion and Doppel
The Mechanism of Na+/K+ Selectivity in Mammalian Voltage-Gated Sodium Channels Based on Molecular Dynamics Simulation  Mengdie Xia, Huihui Liu, Yang Li,
Volume 106, Issue 8, Pages (April 2014)
Electrostatic Properties of Protein-Protein Complexes
On the Thermodynamic Efficiency of Ca2+-ATPase Molecular Machines
Elucidating the Locking Mechanism of Peptides onto Growing Amyloid Fibrils through Transition Path Sampling  Marieke Schor, Jocelyne Vreede, Peter G.
Volume 104, Issue 1, Pages (January 2013)
Theoretical and Computational Investigation of Flagellin Translocation and Bacterial Flagellum Growth  David E. Tanner, Wen Ma, Zhongzhou Chen, Klaus.
Michail Stamatakis, Nikos V. Mantzaris  Biophysical Journal 
Robert M. Elder, Arthi Jayaraman  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 104, Issue 3, Pages (February 2013)
An Equilibrium Model for the Combined Effect of Macromolecular Crowding and Surface Adsorption on the Formation of Linear Protein Fibrils  Travis Hoppe,
Volume 101, Issue 2, Pages (July 2011)
Meng Qin, Jian Zhang, Wei Wang  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 114, Issue 1, Pages (January 2018)
A Comparison of Genotype-Phenotype Maps for RNA and Proteins
Volume 99, Issue 10, Pages (November 2010)
Influence of Protein Scaffold on Side-Chain Transfer Free Energies
Blind Test of Physics-Based Prediction of Protein Structures
Volume 110, Issue 11, Pages (June 2016)
On the Distribution of Protein Refractive Index Increments
Greta Faccio, Stefan Salentinig  Biophysical Journal 
Binding of the Bacteriophage P22 N-Peptide to the boxB RNA Motif Studied by Molecular Dynamics Simulations  Ranjit P. Bahadur, Srinivasaraghavan Kannan,
Volume 113, Issue 4, Pages (August 2017)
Volume 114, Issue 5, Pages (March 2018)
Thomas Gurry, Paul S. Nerenberg, Collin M. Stultz  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 96, Issue 7, Pages (April 2009)
Calcium Enhances Binding of Aβ Monomer to DMPC Lipid Bilayer
Till Siebenmorgen, Martin Zacharias  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 85, Issue 4, Pages (October 2003)
Histone Acetylation Regulates Chromatin Accessibility: Role of H4K16 in Inter- nucleosome Interaction  Ruihan Zhang, Jochen Erler, Jörg Langowski  Biophysical.
Ivan Coluzza, Daan Frenkel  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 98, Issue 11, Pages (June 2010)
Yuguang Mu, Lars Nordenskiöld, James P. Tam  Biophysical Journal 
Rita Pancsa, Daniele Raimondi, Elisa Cilia, Wim F. Vranken 
Structural Flexibility of CaV1. 2 and CaV2
Untangling the Influence of a Protein Knot on Folding
Tsuyoshi Terakawa, Shoji Takada  Biophysical Journal 
Velocity-Dependent Mechanical Unfolding of Bacteriorhodopsin Is Governed by a Dynamic Interaction Network  Christian Kappel, Helmut Grubmüller  Biophysical.
Michael Schlierf, Felix Berkemeier, Matthias Rief  Biophysical Journal 
Insight into Early-Stage Unfolding of GPI-Anchored Human Prion Protein
Volume 108, Issue 1, Pages (January 2015)
M. Müller, K. Katsov, M. Schick  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 83, Issue 6, Pages (December 2002)
Multiple Folding Pathways of the SH3 Domain
Hierarchical Cascades of Instability Govern the Mechanics of Coiled Coils: Helix Unfolding Precedes Coil Unzipping  Elham Hamed, Sinan Keten  Biophysical.
Steven M. Kreuzer, Ron Elber  Biophysical Journal 
Flow-Induced β-Hairpin Folding of the Glycoprotein Ibα β-Switch
Martin Held, Philipp Metzner, Jan-Hendrik Prinz, Frank Noé 
Volume 111, Issue 11, Pages (December 2016)
Steady-State Differential Dose Response in Biological Systems
Volume 110, Issue 1, Pages (January 2016)
Yongli Zhang, Junyi Jiao, Aleksander A. Rebane  Biophysical Journal 
Dependence of Protein Folding Stability and Dynamics on the Density and Composition of Macromolecular Crowders  Jeetain Mittal, Robert B. Best  Biophysical.
Maxwell Henderson, Brigita Urbanc, Luis Cruz  Biophysical Journal 
Amir Marcovitz, Yaakov Levy  Biophysical Journal 
Kinetic Folding Mechanism of Erythropoietin
Zackary N. Scholl, Weitao Yang, Piotr E. Marszalek  Biophysical Journal 
Electrostatic Properties of Protein-Protein Complexes
Volume 114, Issue 4, Pages (February 2018)
Presentation transcript:

Volume 98, Issue 9, Pages 1911-1920 (May 2010) Kinetics and Reaction Coordinates of the Reassembly of Protein Fragments Via Forward Flux Sampling  Ernesto E. Borrero, Lydia M. Contreras Martínez, Matthew P. DeLisa, Fernando A. Escobedo  Biophysical Journal  Volume 98, Issue 9, Pages 1911-1920 (May 2010) DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2009.12.4329 Copyright © 2010 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Contact density map for the unsplit 48-mer system for ensembles of configurations belonging to isocommittor surfaces: pB = 0.2 (top), pB = 0.5 (center), and pB = 0.8 (bottom). The x and y axis represent the amino acid (aa) position in the 48-mer sequence. The ensembles were collected by estimating pB values for all the interfacial points in the TPE from the RxC model in Eq. 1. The lower triangle (below the diagonal line) shows the probability of a native contact to belong to the ensemble; the color code is given by the vertical bar. The lower triangle at the isocommittor surface pB = 0.8 (bottom) shows the 57 pair contacts for the native structure. The upper triangle shows those native contacts with at least 80% probability to belong to the corresponding pB ensemble. Encircled symbols represent native contacts that form the critical folding nucleus. Snapshots depicting typical configurations observed for each ensemble are also shown where red/dark gray indicates native contacts and white indicates native contacts that form the critical folding nuclei. Biophysical Journal 2010 98, 1911-1920DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2009.12.4329) Copyright © 2010 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Schematic showing the difference in free energy, energy, and entropy for the different split systems as they go from the unfolded state, through the TS, and to the folded or reassembled state. For convenience, the properties for the folded state are all set to the same value of zero. Biophysical Journal 2010 98, 1911-1920DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2009.12.4329) Copyright © 2010 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Contact density map for the N-split system for the ensembles of configurations belonging to isocommittor surfaces: pB = 0.2 (top), pB = 0.5 (center), and pB = 0.8 (bottom). The x and y axis represent the amino acid (aa) position in the 48-mer sequence. The ensembles were collected by estimating pB values for all the interfacial points in the TPE from RxC model 2 in Table 2. The lower triangle (below the diagonal line) shows the probability of a native contact to belong to the ensemble. The upper triangle shows those native contacts with at least 80% probability to belong to the corresponding pB ensemble. Encircled symbols represent native contacts that form the original critical folding nucleus. Snapshots depicting typical configurations observed for each ensemble are also shown where green/light gray indicates chain A, blue/black indicates chain B, red/dark gray indicates native contacts, and white indicates native contacts that form the critical folding nuclei. The large squares in dashed lines enclose native intrachain contacts: (green/light gray) chain A and (blue/black) chain B. Biophysical Journal 2010 98, 1911-1920DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2009.12.4329) Copyright © 2010 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Contact density map for the C-split system for ensembles of configurations belonging to isocommittor surfaces: pB = 0.2 (top), pB = 0.5 (center), and pB = 0.8 (bottom). The axes, symbols, lines, and colors have the same interpretation as given in the caption of Fig. 3, except that the upper triangle shows those native contacts with at least 70% probability to belong to the given pB ensemble. Biophysical Journal 2010 98, 1911-1920DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2009.12.4329) Copyright © 2010 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 Contact density map for the Mid-split system for the ensembles of configurations belonging to isocommittor surfaces: pB = 0.2 (top), pB = 0.5 (center), and pB = 0.8 (bottom). The axes, symbols, lines, and colors have the same interpretation as given in the caption of Fig. 3, except that the upper triangle shows those native contacts with at least 70% probability to belong to the given pB ensemble. Biophysical Journal 2010 98, 1911-1920DOI: (10.1016/j.bpj.2009.12.4329) Copyright © 2010 Biophysical Society Terms and Conditions