|
International
Tables for Crystallography Volume F Crystallography of biological macromolecules Edited by M. G. Rossmann and E. Arnold © International Union of Crystallography 2006 |
International Tables for Crystallography (2006). Vol. F. ch. 23.1, p. 578
|
While we do not foresee that automatically delineated domains will be accepted as the gold standard of the trade, modern methods, based on a combination of recurrence and compactness criteria, yield domain definitions that are consistent within protein families and often coincide with biologically functional units, recover the well known folding topologies with many members, produce clusters with good coverage of common secondary-structure elements, and provide a useful basis for large-scale structure analysis and classification.
References
Bennett, M. J. & Eisenberg, D. (1994). Refined structure of monomeric diphtheria toxin at 2.3 Å resolution. Protein Sci. 3, 1464–1475.Google Scholar
Holm, L. & Sander, C. (1999). Protein folds and families: sequence and structure alignments. Nucleic Acids Res. 27, 244–247.Google Scholar
Kraulis, P. J. (1991). MOLSCRIPT: a program to produce both detailed and schematic plots of protein structures. J. Appl. Cryst. 24, 946–950.Google Scholar
Li, M., Dyda, F., Benhar, I., Pastan, I. & Davies, D. R. (1996). Crystal structure of the catalytic domain of Pseudomonas exotoxin A complexed with a nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide analog: implications for the activation process and for ADP ribosylation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 93, 6902–6906.Google Scholar
Lionetti, C., Guanziroli, M. G., Frigerio, F., Ascenzi, P. & Bolognesi, M. (1991). X-ray crystal structure of the ferric sperm whale myoglobin: imidazole complex at 2.0 Å resolution. J. Mol. Biol. 217, 409–412.Google Scholar
Tormo, J., Lamed, R., Chirino, A. J., Morag, E., Bayer, E. A., Shoham, Y. & Steitz, T. A. (1996). Crystal structure of a bacterial family-III cellulose-binding domain: a general mechanism for attachment to cellulose. EMBO J. 15, 5739–5751.Google Scholar
