2017
DOI: 10.1002/pro.3330
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

MolProbity: More and better reference data for improved all‐atom structure validation

Abstract: This paper describes the current update on macromolecular model validation services that are provided at the MolProbity website, emphasizing changes and additions since the previous review in 2010. There have been many infrastructure improvements, including rewrite of previous Java utilities to now use existing or newly written Python utilities in the open-source CCTBX portion of the Phenix software system. This improves long-term maintainability and enhances the thorough integration of MolProbity-style valida… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
2,566
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3,469 publications
(2,572 citation statements)
references
References 67 publications
(90 reference statements)
5
2,566
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…(SAVES, 2020, Williams et al , 2018). Various types of software were used to judge the validity of the model, such as PROCHECK (Laskowski et al , 1996), Verify 3D (Eisenberg et al , 1997), PROVE (Joan Pontius, 1996), and ERRAT (Hooft et al , 1996), in addition to the Ramachandran plot of the MolProbity web server.…”
Section: Sequence Alignment and Modelingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(SAVES, 2020, Williams et al , 2018). Various types of software were used to judge the validity of the model, such as PROCHECK (Laskowski et al , 1996), Verify 3D (Eisenberg et al , 1997), PROVE (Joan Pontius, 1996), and ERRAT (Hooft et al , 1996), in addition to the Ramachandran plot of the MolProbity web server.…”
Section: Sequence Alignment and Modelingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…6NUR, chain A, is a SARS HCoV non-structural protein 12 (nsp12) solved experimentally using cryo-Electron Microscopy (cryo-EM) with 3.1 Å resolution deposited in the protein data bank last year [35]. The Molprobity web server of the Duke University, and the structure analysis and verification server (SAVES) of the University of California Los Angles (UCLA) are used to test the model [36,37]. The program used to judge the validity of the model are PROCHECK [38], Verify 3D [39], PROVE [40], and ERRAT [41] in addition to the Ramachandran plot of the Molprobity.…”
Section: Sequence Alignment and Modelingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The other half-map was used for generating model statistics. The atomic model was validated using Molprobity (Williams et al, 2018), EMRinger (Barad et al, 2015) and the comprehensive validation (cryo-EM) tool in Phenix (Afonine et al, 2018b). The molecular graphics, animations and movies were generated using UCSF Chimera (Pettersen et al, 2004) and UCSF ChimeraX (Goddard et al, 2018).…”
Section: S-protein Ecto Domain Cryo-em Model Buildingmentioning
confidence: 99%