SOLUTION NMR Experimental Data


Experimental Details
Sample Conditions
Sample Contents4 MM N56A-CALBINDIN D9K
Solventn/a
Ionic Strength0
pH6.0
PressureAMBIENT
Temperature (K)300
Experiment(s):2D NOESY
Sample Contents4 MM 15N-LABELED N56A-CALBINDIN D9K;
Solventn/a
Ionic Strength0
pH6.0
PressureAMBIENT
Temperature (K)300
Experiment(s):3D_15N-SEPARATED_NOESY, HSQC-J
Spectrometer Information
Manufacturer Model Field Strength
BRUKER DRX 600.0
VARIAN INOVA 600.0
BRUKER AMX 500.0
NMR Refinement
Method DISTANCE GEOMETRY FOLLOWED BY SIMULATED ANNEALING
Details NMR REFINEMENT WAS BASED ON A TOTAL OF 910 NOE-DERIVED DISTANCE CONSTRAINTS AND 78 TORSION ANGLE CONSTRAINTS. SIMULATED ANNEALING CYCLE OF 20 PS HEATING TO 1200 K.
NMR Ensemble Information
Conformer Selection Criteria STRUCTURES WITH ACCEPTABLE MOLECULAR ENEGIES WERE ORDERED BY LEAST RESTRAINT VIOLATIONS. THE 24 BEST CONFORMERS WERE SELECTED TO FACILITATE COMPARISON TO PREVIOUS STRUCTURES OF THE PROTEIN AND BECAUSE THIS SURPASSES THE STATISTICAL REQUIREMENT TO REPRESENT ALL OF CONFORMATIONAL SPACE CONSISTENT WITH THE DATA.
Conformers Calculated Total Number 50
Conformers Submitted Total Number 24
Representative Model Choice Rationale
1 closest to the average
Additional NMR Experimental Information
1 1H RESONANCE ASIGNMENTS WERE REPORTED IN THE PROTEIN SCIENCE PAPER BY WIMBERLY ET AL. A 3D 15N SPARATED TOCSY WAS RECORDED TO CONFIRM THESE ASSIGNMENTS AND ASSIGN THE 15N RESONANCES.
Computation: NMR Software
# Classification Software Name Author
1 structure solution FELIX 97.0 MSI, SAN DIEGO, CA
2 structure solution DIANA 2.8 GUNTERT, BRAUN, BILLETER, WUTHRICH
3 refinement AMBER 4.1 PEARLMAN, CASE, CALDWELL, ROSS, CHEATHAM, FERGUSON, SEIBEL, SINGH, WEINER, KOLLMAN