Cargando…

Model validation: local diagnosis, correction and when to quit

Traditionally, validation was considered to be a final gatekeeping function, but refinement is smoother and results are better if model validation actively guides corrections throughout structure solution. This shifts emphasis from global to local measures: primarily geometry, conformations and ster...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Richardson, Jane S., Williams, Christopher J., Hintze, Bradley J., Chen, Vincent B., Prisant, Michael G., Videau, Lizbeth L., Richardson, David C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: International Union of Crystallography 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5947777/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29533239
http://dx.doi.org/10.1107/S2059798317009834
_version_ 1783322438030852096
author Richardson, Jane S.
Williams, Christopher J.
Hintze, Bradley J.
Chen, Vincent B.
Prisant, Michael G.
Videau, Lizbeth L.
Richardson, David C.
author_facet Richardson, Jane S.
Williams, Christopher J.
Hintze, Bradley J.
Chen, Vincent B.
Prisant, Michael G.
Videau, Lizbeth L.
Richardson, David C.
author_sort Richardson, Jane S.
collection PubMed
description Traditionally, validation was considered to be a final gatekeeping function, but refinement is smoother and results are better if model validation actively guides corrections throughout structure solution. This shifts emphasis from global to local measures: primarily geometry, conformations and sterics. A fit into the wrong local minimum conformation usually produces outliers in multiple measures. Moving to the right local minimum should be prioritized, rather than small shifts across arbitrary borderlines. Steric criteria work best with all explicit H atoms. ‘Backrub’ motions should be used for side chains and ‘P-perp’ diagnostics to correct ribose puckers. A ‘water’ may actually be an ion, a relic of misfitting or an unmodeled alternate. Beware of wishful thinking in modeling ligands. At high resolution, internally consistent alternate conformations should be modeled and geometry in poor density should not be downweighted. At low resolution, CaBLAM should be used to diagnose protein secondary structure and ERRASER to correct RNA backbone. All atoms should not be forced inside density, beware of sequence misalignment, and very rare conformations such as cis-non-Pro peptides should be avoided. Automation continues to improve, but the crystallographer still must look at each outlier, in the context of density, and correct most of them. For the valid few with unambiguous density and something that is holding them in place, a functional reason should be sought. The expectation is a few outliers, not zero.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5947777
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher International Union of Crystallography
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59477772018-05-15 Model validation: local diagnosis, correction and when to quit Richardson, Jane S. Williams, Christopher J. Hintze, Bradley J. Chen, Vincent B. Prisant, Michael G. Videau, Lizbeth L. Richardson, David C. Acta Crystallogr D Struct Biol Research Papers Traditionally, validation was considered to be a final gatekeeping function, but refinement is smoother and results are better if model validation actively guides corrections throughout structure solution. This shifts emphasis from global to local measures: primarily geometry, conformations and sterics. A fit into the wrong local minimum conformation usually produces outliers in multiple measures. Moving to the right local minimum should be prioritized, rather than small shifts across arbitrary borderlines. Steric criteria work best with all explicit H atoms. ‘Backrub’ motions should be used for side chains and ‘P-perp’ diagnostics to correct ribose puckers. A ‘water’ may actually be an ion, a relic of misfitting or an unmodeled alternate. Beware of wishful thinking in modeling ligands. At high resolution, internally consistent alternate conformations should be modeled and geometry in poor density should not be downweighted. At low resolution, CaBLAM should be used to diagnose protein secondary structure and ERRASER to correct RNA backbone. All atoms should not be forced inside density, beware of sequence misalignment, and very rare conformations such as cis-non-Pro peptides should be avoided. Automation continues to improve, but the crystallographer still must look at each outlier, in the context of density, and correct most of them. For the valid few with unambiguous density and something that is holding them in place, a functional reason should be sought. The expectation is a few outliers, not zero. International Union of Crystallography 2018-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5947777/ /pubmed/29533239 http://dx.doi.org/10.1107/S2059798317009834 Text en © Richardson et al. 2018 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/uk/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and source are cited.http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/uk/
spellingShingle Research Papers
Richardson, Jane S.
Williams, Christopher J.
Hintze, Bradley J.
Chen, Vincent B.
Prisant, Michael G.
Videau, Lizbeth L.
Richardson, David C.
Model validation: local diagnosis, correction and when to quit
title Model validation: local diagnosis, correction and when to quit
title_full Model validation: local diagnosis, correction and when to quit
title_fullStr Model validation: local diagnosis, correction and when to quit
title_full_unstemmed Model validation: local diagnosis, correction and when to quit
title_short Model validation: local diagnosis, correction and when to quit
title_sort model validation: local diagnosis, correction and when to quit
topic Research Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5947777/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29533239
http://dx.doi.org/10.1107/S2059798317009834
work_keys_str_mv AT richardsonjanes modelvalidationlocaldiagnosiscorrectionandwhentoquit
AT williamschristopherj modelvalidationlocaldiagnosiscorrectionandwhentoquit
AT hintzebradleyj modelvalidationlocaldiagnosiscorrectionandwhentoquit
AT chenvincentb modelvalidationlocaldiagnosiscorrectionandwhentoquit
AT prisantmichaelg modelvalidationlocaldiagnosiscorrectionandwhentoquit
AT videaulizbethl modelvalidationlocaldiagnosiscorrectionandwhentoquit
AT richardsondavidc modelvalidationlocaldiagnosiscorrectionandwhentoquit