Journal of Biomolecular NMR

, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp 139–146 | Cite as

BioMagResBank database with sets of experimental NMR constraints corresponding to the structures of over 1400 biomolecules deposited in the Protein Data Bank

  • Jurgen F. Doreleijers
  • Steve Mading
  • Dimitri Maziuk
  • Kassandra Sojourner
  • Lei Yin
  • Jun Zhu
  • John L. Markley
  • Eldon L. Ulrich
Article

Abstract

Experimental constraints associated with NMR structures are available from the Protein Data Bank (PDB) in the form of `Magnetic Resonance' (MR) files. These files contain multiple types of data concatenated without boundary markers and are difficult to use for further research. Reported here are the results of a project initiated to annotate, archive, and disseminate these data to the research community from a searchable resource in a uniform format. The MR files from a set of 1410 NMR structures were analyzed and their original constituent data blocks annotated as to data type using a semi-automated protocol. A new software program called Wattos was then used to parse and archive the data in a relational database. From the total number of MR file blocks annotated as constraints, it proved possible to parse 84% (3337/3975). The constraint lists that were parsed correspond to three data types (2511 distance, 788 dihedral angle, and 38 residual dipolar couplings lists) from the three most popular software packages used in NMR structure determination: XPLOR/CNS (2520 lists), DISCOVER (412 lists), and DYANA/DIANA (405 lists). These constraints were then mapped to a developmental version of the BioMagResBank (BMRB) data model. A total of 31 data types originating from 16 programs have been classified, with the NOE distance constraint being the most commonly observed. The results serve as a model for the development of standards for NMR constraint deposition in computer-readable form. The constraints are updated regularly and are available from the BMRB web site (http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu).

biomolecular structure BMRB constraints database dihedral angle nuclear magnetic resonance nuclear Overhauser effect residual dipolar coupling structure 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anger, S., Bayer, D., Cason, C., Dailey, C., Dilger, A., Demlow, S., Enzmann, A., Farmer, D., Wenger, T. and Young, C. (2002) Persistence of Vision Raytracer, http://www.povray.orgGoogle Scholar
  2. Berman, H.M., Westbrook, J., Feng, Z., Gilliland, G., Bhat, T.N., Weissig, H., Shindyalov, I.N. and Bourne, P.E. (2000) Nucl. Acids Res., 28, 235-242.Google Scholar
  3. Bernstein, F.C., Koetzle, T.F., Williams, G.J., Meyer, E.E., Jr., Brice, M.D., Rodgers, J.R., Kennard, O., Shimanouchi, T. and Tasumi, M. (1977) J. Mol. Biol., 112, 535-542.Google Scholar
  4. Brünger, A.T. (1992) In X-PLOR, Version 3.1: A System for X-Ray Crystallography and NMR, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  5. Brünger, A.T., Adams, P.D., Clore, G.M., DeLano, W.L., Gros, P., Grosse-Kunstleve, R.W., Jiang, J.S., Kuszewski, J., Nilges, M., Pannu, N.S., Read, R.J., Rice, L.M., Simonson, T. and Warren, G.L. (1998) Acta Cryst., D54, 905-921.Google Scholar
  6. Chou, J.J., Li, S., Klee, C.B. and Bax, A. (2001) Nat. Struct. Biol., 8, 990-997.Google Scholar
  7. de Alba, E., De Vries, L., Farquhar, M.G. and Tjandra, N. (1999) J. Mol. Biol., 291, 927-939.Google Scholar
  8. Doreleijers, J.F., Raves, M.L., Rullmann, T. and Kaptein, R. (1999) J. Biomol. NMR, 14, 123-132.Google Scholar
  9. Fogh, R.H., Ionides, J., Ulrich, E.L., Boucher, W., Vranken, W., Linge, J., Habeck, M., Rieping W., Bhat, T.N., Westbrook, J., Henrick, K., Gilliland, G., Berman, H., Thornton, J.M., Nilges, M., Markley, J.L. and Laue, E. (2002) Nat. Struct. Biol., 9, 416-418.Google Scholar
  10. Garrett, D.S. PIPP (2002) http://spin.niddk.nih.gov/clore/Software/software.htmlGoogle Scholar
  11. Güntert, P., Braun, W. and Wüthrich, K. (1991) J. Mol. Biol., 217, 517-530.Google Scholar
  12. Kabsch, W. and Sander, C. (1983) Biopolymers, 22, 2577-2637.Google Scholar
  13. Koradi, R., Billeter, M. and Wüthrich, K. (1996) J. Mol. Graph., 14, 51-55.Google Scholar
  14. Linge, J.P., O'Donoghue, S.I. and Nilges, M. (2001) Meth. Enzymol., 339, 71-90.Google Scholar
  15. McLoughlin, L. Mirror (1998) ftp://sunsite.org.uk/packages/mirror/Google Scholar
  16. Nakai, T., Kidera, A. and Nakamura, H. (1993) J. Biomol. NMR, 3, 19-40.Google Scholar
  17. Seavey, B.R., Farr, E.A., Westler, W.M. and Markley, J.L. (1991) J. Biomol. NMR, 1, 217-236.Google Scholar
  18. star/dictionary.htmlGoogle Scholar
  19. Ulrich, E.L., Ioannidis, Y.E., Livny, M., Mading, S., Slatter, N.C. and Markley, J.L. (1998) XVIIth International Conference on Magnetic Resonance in Biological Systems, Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
  20. Weiner, S.J., Collman, P.A., Case, D.A., Singh, U.C., Ghio, C., Alagona, G., Profetar, J.S. and Weiner, P. (1984) J. Am. Chem. Soc., 106, 765-784.Google Scholar
  21. Westbrook, J.D. and Bourne, P.E. (2000) Bioinformatics, 16, 159-168.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jurgen F. Doreleijers
    • 1
  • Steve Mading
    • 1
  • Dimitri Maziuk
    • 1
  • Kassandra Sojourner
    • 1
  • Lei Yin
    • 2
  • Jun Zhu
    • 3
  • John L. Markley
    • 1
  • Eldon L. Ulrich
    • 1
  1. 1.BioMagResBank, Department of BiochemistryUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonU.S.A
  2. 2.Keithley Instruments Inc.ClevelandU.S.A
  3. 3.Department of Animal Health and Biomedical SciencesUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonU.S.A

Personalised recommendations