Skip to main content
Log in

Analysis of the performance of the CHESHIRE and YAPP methods at CASD-NMR round 3

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal of Biomolecular NMR Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We present an analysis of the results obtained at CASD-NMR round 3 by the CHESHIRE and the YAPP methods. To determine protein structures, the CHESHIRE method uses solely information provided by NMR chemical shifts, while the YAPP method uses an automated assignment of NOESY spectra. Of the ten targets of CASD-NMR round 3, nine CHESHIRE predictions and eight YAPP ones were submitted. The eight YAPP predictions ranged from 0.7 to 1.9 Å Cα accuracy, with an average of 1.3 Å. The nine CHESHIRE predictions ranged from 0.8 to 2.6 Å Cα accuracy for the ordered regions of the proteins, with an average of 1.6 Å. Taken together, these results illustrate how the NOESY based YAPP method and the chemical shift based CHESHIRE method can provide structures of comparable quality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Cavalli A et al (2007) Protein structure determination from NMR chemical shifts. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104(23):9615–9620

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Cavalli A, Montalvao RW, Vendruscolo M (2011) Using chemical shifts to determine structural changes in proteins upon complex formation. J Phys Chem B 115(30):9491–9494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fu B et al (2014) ALMOST: an all atom molecular simulation toolkit for protein structure determination. J Comput Chem 35(14):1101–1105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guntert P, Mumenthaler C, Wuthrich K (1997) Torsion angle dynamics for NMR structure calculation with the new program DYANA. J Mol Biol 273(1):283–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habeck M et al (2004) NOE assignment with ARIA 2.0: the nuts and bolts. Meth. Mol Biol 278:379–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann T, Guntert P, Wuthrich K (2002) Protein NMR structure determination with automated NOE assignment using the new software CANDID and the torsion angle dynamics algorithm DYANA. J Mol Biol 319(1):209–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jain A, Vaidehi N, Rodriguez G (1993) A fast recursive algorithm for molecular-dynamics simulation. J Comput Phys 106(2):258–268

    Article  MATH  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Moult J, et al (1995) A large-scale experiment to assess protein structure prediction methods. Proteins 23(3):ii–v

  • Rosato A et al (2009) CASD-NMR: critical assessment of automated structure determination by NMR. Nat Methods 6(9):625–626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosato A et al (2012) Blind testing of routine, fully automated determination of protein structures from NMR data. Structure 20(2):227–236

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Shen Y et al (2009) TALOS+: a hybrid method for predicting protein backbone torsion angles from NMR chemical shifts. J Biomol NMR 44(4):213–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siew N et al (2000) MaxSub: an automated measure for the assessment of protein structure prediction quality. Bioinformatics 16(9):776–785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Z et al (2014) Robust and highly accurate automatic NOESY assignment and structure determination with Rosetta. J Biomol NMR 59(3):135–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michele Vendruscolo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cavalli, A., Vendruscolo, M. Analysis of the performance of the CHESHIRE and YAPP methods at CASD-NMR round 3. J Biomol NMR 62, 503–509 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10858-015-9940-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10858-015-9940-9

Keywords

Navigation