Journal of Biomolecular NMR

, Volume 63, Issue 1, pp 85–95 | Cite as

MERA: a webserver for evaluating backbone torsion angle distributions in dynamic and disordered proteins from NMR data

  • Alexey B. Mantsyzov
  • Yang Shen
  • Jung Ho Lee
  • Gerhard Hummer
  • Ad Bax


MERA (Maximum Entropy Ramachandran map Analysis from NMR data) is a new webserver that generates residue-by-residue Ramachandran map distributions for disordered proteins or disordered regions in proteins on the basis of experimental NMR parameters. As input data, the program currently utilizes up to 12 different parameters. These include three different types of short-range NOEs, three types of backbone chemical shifts (15N, 13Cα, and 13C′), six types of J couplings (3JHNHα, 3JC′C′, 3JC′Hα, 1JHαCα, 2JCαN and 1JCαN), as well as the 15N-relaxation derived J(0) spectral density. The Ramachandran map distributions are reported in terms of populations of their 15° × 15° voxels, and an adjustable maximum entropy weight factor is available to ensure that the obtained distributions will not deviate more from a newly derived coil library distribution than required to account for the experimental data. MERA output includes the agreement between each input parameter and its distribution-derived value. As an application, we demonstrate performance of the program for several residues in the intrinsically disordered protein α-synuclein, as well as for several static and dynamic residues in the folded protein GB3.


Coil library IDP Karplus curve Random coil Short-range NOE α-Synuclein 



This work was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (Grant 14-14-00598) and by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and the Intramural Antiviral Target Program of the Office of the Director, NIH, and by the Max Planck Society. JHL is the recipient of a KVSTA fellowship.


  1. Baldwin RL, Rose GD (1999) Is protein folding hierarchic? I. Local structure and peptide folding. Trends Biochem Sci 24:26–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ball KA, Phillips AH, Nerenberg PS, Fawzi NL, Wemmer DE, Head-Gordon T (2011) Homogeneous and heterogeneous tertiary structure ensembles of amyloid-beta peptides. Biochemistry 50:7612–7628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berjanskii MV, Wishart DS (2005) A simple method to predict protein flexibility using secondary chemical shifts. J Am Chem Soc 127:14970–14971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernado P, Mylonas E, Petoukhov MV, Blackledge M, Svergun DI (2007) Structural characterization of flexible proteins using small-angle X-ray scattering. J Am Chem Soc 129:5656–5664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bertoncini CW, Rasia RM, Lamberto GR, Binolfi A, Zweckstetter M, Griesinger C, Fernandez CO (2007) Structural characterization of the intrinsically unfolded protein beta-synuclein, a natural negative regulator of alpha-synuclein aggregation. J Mol Biol 372:708–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bruschweiler R, Case DA (1994) Adding harmonic motion to the Karplus relation for spin–spin coupling. J Am Chem Soc 116:11199–11200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Derrick JP, Wigley DB (1994) The 3rd Igg-binding domain from streptococcal protein-G—an analysis by X-ray crystallography of the structure alone and in a complex with fab. J Mol Biol 243:906–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ding KY, Gronenborn AM (2004) Protein backbone H-1(N)-C-13(alpha) and N-15-C-13(alpha) residual dipolar and J couplings: new constraints for NMR structure determination. J Am Chem Soc 126:6232–6233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dyson HJ, Wright PE (1991) Defining solution conformations of small linear peptides. Annu Rev Biophys Biophys Chem 20:519–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dyson HJ, Wright PE (2004) Unfolded proteins and protein folding studied by NMR. Chem Rev 104:3607–3622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dyson HJ, Wright PE (2005) Intrinsically unstructured proteins and their functions. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 6:197–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Farrow NA, Zhang OW, Szabo A, Torchia DA, Kay LE (1995) Spectral density-function mapping using N-15 relaxation data exclusively. J Biomol NMR 6:153–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fitzkee NC, Fleming PJ, Rose GD (2005) The protein coil library: a structural database of nonhelix, nonstrand fragments derived from the PDB. Proteins 58:852–854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Graf J, Nguyen PH, Stock G, Schwalbe H (2007) Structure and dynamics of the homologous series of alanine peptides: a joint molecular dynamics/NMR study. J Am Chem Soc 129:1179–1189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hagarman A, Measey TJ, Mathieu D, Schwalbe H, Schweitzer-Stenner R (2010) Intrinsic propensities of amino acid residues in G×G peptides inferred from amide I’ band profiles and NMR scalar coupling constants. J Am Chem Soc 132:540–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hall JB, Fushman D (2003) Characterization of the overall and local dynamics of a protein with intermediate rotational anisotropy: differentiating between conformational exchange and anisotropic diffusion in the B3 domain of protein G. J Biomol NMR 27:261–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Han B, Liu YF, Ginzinger SW, Wishart DS (2011) SHIFTX2: significantly improved protein chemical shift prediction. J Biomol NMR 50:43–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ingber L (1989) Very fast simulated re-annealing. Math Comput Model 12:967–973zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kjaergaard M, Brander S, Poulsen FM (2011) Random coil chemical shift for intrinsically disordered proteins: effects of temperature and pH. J Biomol NMR 49:139–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Koradi R, Billeter M, Wuthrich K (1996) MOLMOL: a program for display and analysis of macromolecular structures. J Mol Graph 14:51–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Krzeminski M, Marsh JA, Neale C, Choy W-Y, Forman-Kay JD (2013) Characterization of disordered proteins with ENSEMBLE. Bioinformatics 29:398–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kullback S, Leibler RA (1951) On information and sufficiency. Ann Math Stat 22:79–86zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lee JH, Li F, Grishaev A, Bax A (2015) Quantitative residue-specific protein backbone torsion angle dynamics from concerted measurement of 3 J couplings. J Am Chem Soc 137:1432–1435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li F, Lee JH, Grishaev A, Ying J, Bax A (2015) High accuracy of Karplus equations for relating three-bond J couplings to protein backbone torsion angles. ChemPhysChem 16:572–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Long HW, Tycko R (1998) Biopolymer conformational distributions from solid-state NMR: alpha-helix and 3(10)-helix contents of a helical peptide. J Am Chem Soc 120:7039–7048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. MacArthur MW, Thornton JM (1996) Deviations from planarity of the peptide bond in peptides and proteins. J Mol Biol 264:1180–1195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maltsev AS, Ying JF, Bax A (2012) Impact of N-terminal acetylation of α-synuclein on its random coil and lipid binding properties. Biochemistry 51:5004–5013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maltsev AS, Grishaev A, Roche J, Zasloff M, Bax A (2014) Improved cross validation of a static ubiquitin structure derived from high precision residual dipolar couplings measured in a drug-based liquid crystalline phase. J Am Chem Soc 136:3752–3755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mantsyzov AB, Maltsev AS, Ying J, Shen Y, Hummer G, Bax A (2014) A maximum entropy approach to the study of residue-specific backbone angle distributions in alpha-synuclein, an intrinsically disordered protein. Protein Sci 23:1275–1290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mittag T, Forman-Kay JD (2007) Atomic-level characterization of disordered protein ensembles. Curr Opin Struct Biol 17:3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mittag T, Kay LE, Forman-Kay JD (2010) Protein dynamics and conformational disorder in molecular recognition. J Mol Recognit 23:105–116Google Scholar
  32. Rezaei-Ghaleh N, Blackledge M, Zweckstetter M (2012) Intrinsically disordered proteins: from sequence and conformational properties toward drug discovery. ChemBioChem 13:930–950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rozycki B, Kim YC, Hummer G (2011) SAXS ensemble refinement of ESCRT-III CHMP3 conformational transitions. Structure 19:109–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Salmon L, Nodet G, Ozenne V, Yin GW, Jensen MR, Zweckstetter M, Blackledge M (2010) NMR characterization of long-range order in intrinsically disordered proteins. J Am Chem Soc 132:8407–8418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shen Y, Bax A (2007) Protein backbone chemical shifts predicted from searching a database for torsion angle and sequence homology. J Biomol NMR 38:289–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Shen Y, Bax A (2010) SPARTA plus: a modest improvement in empirical NMR chemical shift prediction by means of an artificial neural network. J Biomol NMR 48:13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Shen Y, Bax A (2013) Protein backbone and sidechain torsion angles predicted from NMR chemical shifts using artificial neural networks. J Biomol NMR 56:227–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Shi ZS, Chen K, Liu ZG, Kallenbach NR (2006) Conformation of the backbone in unfolded proteins. Chem Rev 106:1877–1897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sickmeier M, Hamilton JA, LeGall T, Vacic V, Cortese MS, Tantos A, Szabo B, Tompa P, Chen J, Uversky VN, Obradovic Z, Dunker AK (2007) DisProt: the database of disordered proteins. Nucleic Acids Res 35:D786–D793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Smith LJ, Bolin KA, Schwalbe H, MacArthur MW, Thornton JM, Dobson CM (1996) Analysis of main chain torsion angles in proteins: prediction of NMR coupling constants for native and random coil conformations. J Mol Biol 255:494–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Szu H, Hartley R (1987) Fast simulated annealing. Phys Lett A 122:157–162CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  42. Ulmer TS, Ramirez BE, Delaglio F, Bax A (2003) Evaluation of backbone proton positions and dynamics in a small protein by liquid crystal NMR spectroscopy. J Am Chem Soc 125:9179–9191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Uversky VN, Dunker AK (2010) Understanding protein non-folding. BBA-Proteins. Proteomics 1804:1231–1264Google Scholar
  44. van der Lee R, Buljan M, Lang B, Weatheritt RJ, Daughdrill GW, Dunker AK, Fuxreiter M, Gough J, Gsponer J, Jones DT, Kim PM, Kriwacki RW, Oldfield CJ, Pappu RV, Tompa P, Uversky VN, Wright PE, Babu MM (2014) Classification of intrinsically disordered regions and proteins. Chem Rev 114:6589–6631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Varadi M, Kosol S, Lebrun P, Valentini E, Blackledge M, Dunker AK, Felli IC, Forman-Kay JD, Kriwacki RW, Pierattelli R, Sussman J, Svergun DI, Uversky VN, Vendruscolo M, Wishart D, Wright PE, Tompa P (2014) pE-DB: a database of structural ensembles of intrinsically disordered and of unfolded proteins. Nucleic Acids Res 42:D326–D335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vuister GW, Delaglio F, Bax A (1993) The use of 1JCαHα coupling constants as a probe for protein backbone conformation. J Biomol NMR 3:67–80Google Scholar
  47. Wang AC, Bax A (1996) Determination of the backbone dihedral angles phi in human ubiquitin from reparametrized empirical Karplus equations. J Am Chem Soc 118:2483–2494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wang YJ, Jardetzky O (2002) Investigation of the neighboring residue effects on protein chemical shifts. J Am Chem Soc 124:14075–14084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wirmer J, Schwalbe H (2002) Angular dependence of 1 J(NCa) and 2 J(NCa) coupling constants measured in J-modulated HSQCs. J Biomol NMR 23:47–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yao L, Vogeli B, Torchia DA, Bax A (2008) Simultaneous NMR study of protein structure and dynamics using conservative mutagenesis. J Phys Chem B 112:6045–6056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ying J, Roche J, Bax A (2014) Homonuclear decoupling for enhancing resolution and sensitivity in NOE and RDC measurements of peptides and proteins. J Magn Reson 241:97–102CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht (outside the USA) 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexey B. Mantsyzov
    • 1
  • Yang Shen
    • 2
  • Jung Ho Lee
    • 2
  • Gerhard Hummer
    • 3
  • Ad Bax
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of Fundamental MedicineM.V. Lomonosov Moscow State UniversityMoscowRussian Federation
  2. 2.Laboratory of Chemical Physics, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthBethesdaUSA
  3. 3.Max Planck Institute of BiophysicsFrankfurt am MainGermany

Personalised recommendations