Dear sir
Iam in to modelling assignment of a zinc finger protein, which has nearly 6 zinc fingers The nearest template (1MEY) to it covers only 50% of the sequence length and has 3 fingers corresponding to 3 chains in the template. 1. i would like to know the method of representing the alignment in .ali file for chain breaks 2. i modelled this in a different manner. I aligned the query with the template for only 50% of the sequence and assumed that these chains belong to different pdb files and hence modelled the query protein like what we do for a chimeric protein(without DNA chains). Outcome: i got a 3D Model which did not represent the actual template, since the coordinates of DNA was not incorporated in it. I dont know why DNA was not built and as a result, the protein appeared to be bent. (a) Can this be correlated to confirmational changes taking place bcoz of the absence of DNA binding to the protein (b) Or is this an error. Then i tried to model the same protein with nucleotides, but how do we represent the nucleotides in the target sequence, as it consists of only aminoacids. should there be a delimiter like a { , } to separate the dna sequence from the amino acid sequence. 3. The three fingers in the template are exactly identical from the sequence point of view. Hence when i looked in to the structure, there appeared to be a symmetric element in which the first and second zinc fingers where displaced. (a) How do i infer that symmetric element (b) after obtaining that symmetric element can i now generate one more 4more fingers so that i can cover my full sequence. (c) after building such a model, will it be biologically valid.
plz answer
modeller_usage-request@salilab.org wrote: Send modeller_usage mailing list submissions to modeller_usage@salilab.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://salilab.org/mailman/listinfo/modeller_usage or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to modeller_usage-request@salilab.org
You can reach the person managing the list at modeller_usage-owner@salilab.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of modeller_usage digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Terminal patching (acetylation/amidation) in Modeller 7.7 (Modeller Caretaker) 2. NOC 2.0 released (Chenmengen) 3. Some theoretical questions (Dmitry Osolodkin) 4. Re: Some theoretical questions (Modeller Caretaker)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 17:16:29 -0700 From: Modeller Caretaker Subject: Re: [modeller_usage] Terminal patching (acetylation/amidation) in Modeller 7.7 To: "Niels Johan Christensen" , modeller_usage@salilab.org Message-ID: 42C096DD.4080603@salilab.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
"Niels Johan Christensen" wrote: > A good deal of my previous work (calculation of various electronic > properties) is based on structures from non terminal patched MODELLER > 7.7 models. To be consistent, I would like to introduce the terminal > acetylation/amidation with MODELLER 7.7 and subsequently calculate > properties for (fragments of) these models. > > (Regarding "consistency", I am mainly considering the fact that I get > slightly different models from versions 7.7 and 8.1 despite using the > same template/sequence. The only difference in the input conditions, > is that in the former case I use TOP scipting while in the latter I > use Python.)
Your reasoning is incorrect; the difference between Modeller 7v7 and 8v1 is that they were built with different Fortran compiler versions. Over time, the way the compiler vendors optimize code (e.g. the ordering of floating point operations) leads to very small changes in the results. You'll also notice that if you build models on a Windows machine, for example, that they'll differ from those built on a Linux box, for the same reason. The Python and TOP interfaces to Modeller give the same results (for equivalent scripts, on the same machine and Modeller version) and in fact are tested precisely to ensure this.
Your script doesn't work in Modeller 7v7 because the patch residue CT2 in ${LIB}/top_heav.lib incorrectly adds hydrogens. This was one of the bugs fixed in Modeller 8v1. You can fix it yourself by comparing the top_heav.lib file from the two versions, and correcting the 7v7 copy.
Ben Webb, Modeller Caretaker
rathankar rao wrote: > Iam in to modelling assignment of a zinc finger protein, which has > nearly 6 zinc fingers > The nearest template (1MEY) to it covers only 50% of the sequence length > and has 3 fingers corresponding to 3 chains in the template. > 1. i would like to know the method of representing the alignment in .ali > file for chain breaks
Use the / character to represent a chain break in your alignment. See http://salilab.org/modeller/manual/node175.html
> 2. i modelled this in a different manner. I aligned the query with the > template for only 50% of the sequence and assumed that these chains > belong to different pdb files and hence modelled the query protein like > what we do for a chimeric protein(without DNA chains). > *Outcome: *i got a 3D Model which did not represent the actual template, > since the coordinates of DNA was not incorporated in it. I dont know why > DNA was not built and as a result, the protein appeared to be bent.
To model DNA is like modeling any other non-standard ligand; see http://salilab.org/modeller/FAQ.html#10
Ben Webb, Modeller Caretaker
participants (2)
-
Modeller Caretaker
-
rathankar rao