1996
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0134(199607)25:3<300::aid-prot3>3.3.co;2-q
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Identification and analysis of long‐range electrostatic effects in proteins by computer modeling:aspartate transcarbamylase

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
15
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
2
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, the observed asymmetry in the charge-backbone interactions follows directly from the nature of the peptide bond. Oberoi et al (1996) have noticed that most of the large chargebackbone interactions (1) are attractive, (2) are paired with a large positive Born term, and (3) correspond to anionic groups. Taking into consideration the asymmetry of charge-backbone interaction, discussed above, this observation can be generalized for the acidic groups in proteins.…”
Section: Asymmetry Of Charge-backbone Interactions In Proteinssupporting
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Thus, the observed asymmetry in the charge-backbone interactions follows directly from the nature of the peptide bond. Oberoi et al (1996) have noticed that most of the large chargebackbone interactions (1) are attractive, (2) are paired with a large positive Born term, and (3) correspond to anionic groups. Taking into consideration the asymmetry of charge-backbone interaction, discussed above, this observation can be generalized for the acidic groups in proteins.…”
Section: Asymmetry Of Charge-backbone Interactions In Proteinssupporting
confidence: 92%
“…It has been found that the ionizable groups are situated in regions where favorable interactions with the peptide dipoles occur (Olson & Spassov, 1987). This finding is consistent with the observation that the destabilizing effect of the charge dehydration is compensated by the electrostatic contribution of the peptide dipoles (Bashford & Karplus, 1990;Oberoi et al, 1996).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The indirect interaction between the two members of this hydrogen bond would favor complex formation, since solvent would screen their favorable electrostatic interaction less in the bound state than in the unbound state. An important result of the work reported here is that energetics due to indirect effects are significant, though the importance of this term has generally not been recognized~Elcock & McCammon, 1996;Oberoi et al, 1996;Chong et al, 1998;Kangas & Tidor, 1998!. Summing each type of term for every group in the GCN4 leucine zipper~in a manner that counts each interaction once! showed that the electrostatic effect of complex formation is destabilizing because the unfavorable solvation term~24.0 kcal0mol!…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Electrostatic interactions depend on the attraction and repulsion of charged groups and the consequent desolvation of these groups 114. Charge interactions are important because they can influence protein stability and ligand binding, which in turn affect the structure and solvation of molecules 115–117. Polyanions form electrostatic interactions primarily with lysine and arginine residues within proteins.…”
Section: Specific Versus Non‐specific Interactionsmentioning
confidence: 99%