Search

Integrative structural biology synergizes experimental data with computational methods to elucidate the structures and interactions within biomolecules, a task that becomes critical in the absence of high-resolution structural data. A challenging step for integrating the data is knowing the expected accuracy or belief in the dataset. We previously showed that the Modeling Employing Limited Data (MELD) approach succeeds at predicting structures and finding the best interpretation of the data when the initial belief is equal to or slightly lower than the real value. However, the initial belief might be unknown to the user, as it depends on both the technique and the system of study. Here we introduce MELD-Adapt, designed to dynamically evaluate and infer the reliability of input data while at the same time finding the best interpretation of the data and the structures compatible with it. We demonstrate the utility of this method across different systems, particularly emphasizing its capability to correct initial assumptions and identify the correct fraction of data to produce reliable structural models. The approach is tested with two benchmark sets: the folding of 12 proteins with coarse physical insights and the binding of peptides with varying affinities to the extraterminal domain using chemical shift perturbation data. We find that subtle differences in data structure (e.g., locally clustered or globally distributed), starting belief, and force field preferences can have an impact on the predictions, limiting the possibility of a transferable protocol across all systems and data types. Nonetheless, we find a wide range of initial setup conditions that will lead to successful sampling and identification of native states, leading to a robust pipeline. Furthermore, disagreements about how much data is enforced and satisfied rapidly serve to identify incorrect setup conditions.

Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations are ideally suited to describe conformational ensembles of biomolecules such as proteins and nucleic acids. Microsecond-long simulations are now routine, facilitated by the emergence of graphical processing units. Clustering, which groups objects based on structural similarity, is typically used to process ensembles, leading to different states, their populations, and the identification of representative structures. A popular pipeline combines hierarchical clustering for clustering and selecting the cluster centroid as representative of the cluster. Here, we propose to improve on this approach, by developing a module-Protein Retrieval via Integrative Molecular Ensembles (PRIME), that consists of tools to improve the prediction of the representative in the most populated cluster using extended continuous similarity. PRIME is integrated with our Molecular Dynamics Analysis with N -ary Clustering Ensembles (MDANCE) package and can be used as a postprocessing tool for arbitrary clustering algorithms, compatible with several MD suites. PRIME predictions produced structures that when aligned to the experimental structure were better superposed (lower RMSD). A further benefit of PRIME is its linear scaling─rather than the traditional O( N 2 ) traditionally associated with comparisons of elements in a set.

Identifying the interactome for a protein of interest is challenging due to the large number of possible binders. High-throughput experimental approaches narrow down possible binding partners but often include false positives. Furthermore, they provide no information about what the binding region is (e.g., the binding epitope). We introduce a novel computational pipeline based on an AlphaFold2 (AF) Competitive Binding Assay (AF-CBA) to identify proteins that bind a target of interest from a pull-down experiment and the binding epitope. Our focus is on proteins that bind the Extraterminal (ET) domain of Bromo and Extraterminal domain (BET) proteins, but we also introduce nine additional systems to show transferability to other peptide-protein systems. We describe a series of limitations to the methodology based on intrinsic deficiencies of AF and AF-CBA to help users identify scenarios where the approach will be most useful. Given the method's speed and accuracy, we anticipate its broad applicability to identify binding epitope regions among potential partners, setting the stage for experimental verification., (© 2024 Wiley-VCH GmbH.)

Generative models of protein sequence families are an important tool in the repertoire of protein scientists and engineers alike. However, state-of-the-art generative approaches face inference, accuracy, and overfitting- related obstacles when modeling moderately sized to large proteins and/or protein families with low sequence coverage. Here, we present a simple to learn, tunable, and accurate generative model, GENERALIST: GENERAtive nonLInear tenSor-factorizaTion for protein sequences. GENERALIST accurately captures several high order summary statistics of amino acid covariation. GENERALIST also predicts conservative local optimal sequences which are likely to fold in stable 3D structure. Importantly, unlike current methods, the density of sequences in GENERALIST-modeled sequence ensembles closely resembles the corresponding natural ensembles. Finally, GENERALIST embeds protein sequences in an informative latent space. GENERALIST will be an important tool to study protein sequence variability., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Akl et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Identifying the interactome for a protein of interest is challenging due to the large number of possible binders. High‐throughput experimental approaches narrow down possible binding partners but often include false positives. Furthermore, they provide no information about what the binding region is (e.g., the binding epitope). We introduce a novel computational pipeline based on an AlphaFold2 (AF) Competitive Binding Assay (AF‐CBA) to identify proteins that bind a target of interest from a pull‐down experiment and the binding epitope. Our focus is on proteins that bind the Extraterminal (ET) domain of Bromo and Extraterminal domain (BET) proteins, but we also introduce nine additional systems to show transferability to other peptide‐protein systems. We describe a series of limitations to the methodology based on intrinsic deficiencies of AF and AF‐CBA to help users identify scenarios where the approach will be most useful. Given the method's speed and accuracy, we anticipate its broad applicability to identify binding epitope regions among potential partners, setting the stage for experimental verification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]