SOLUTION NMR Experimental Data


Experimental Details
Sample Conditions
Sample Contents2 mM [U-99% 13C; U-99% 15N] hPDI-bb, 25 mM sodium phosphate, 70 mM sodium chloride, 0.5 mM EDTA, 5 mM DTT, 90% H2O/10% D2O
Solvent90% H2O/10% D2O
Ionic Strength0.1
pH7.0
Pressure1
Temperature (K)303
Experiment(s):2D 1H-15N HSQC, 3D 1H-15N NOESY
Sample Contents2 mM hPDI-bb, 25 mM sodium phosphate, 70 mM sodium chloride, 0.5 mM EDTA, 5 mM DTT, 100% D2O
Solvent100% D2O
Ionic Strength0.1
pH7.0
Pressure1
Temperature (K)303
Experiment(s):2D 1H-13C HSQC, 3D 1H-13C NOESY
Sample Contents0.5 mM [U-99% 15N] hPDI-bb, 25 mM sodium phosphate, 70 mM sodium chloride, 0.5 mM EDTA, 5 mM DTT, 12 mg/mL Pf1 phages, 90% H2O/10% D2O
Solvent90% H2O/10% D2O
Ionic Strength0.1
pH7.0
Pressure1
Temperature (K)303
Experiment(s):IPAP-HSQC
Spectrometer Information
Manufacturer Model Field Strength
Bruker DRX 600.0
Varian Unity Inova 800.0
NMR Refinement
Method simulated annealing
Details structure was refined by using standard protocol in CNS with restraints from NOE distances, backbone torsions, hydrogen bonds and residual dipolar couplings
NMR Ensemble Information
Conformer Selection Criteria structures with the lowest energy and the least restraint violations
Conformers Calculated Total Number 200
Conformers Submitted Total Number 10
Representative Model Choice Rationale
1 lowest energy
Additional NMR Experimental Information
1 Structure was determined using multi-dimentional NMR spectroscopy
Computation: NMR Software
# Classification Software Name Author
1 data analysis TALOS Cornilescu, Delaglio and Bax
2 data analysis ARIA 1.1 Linge, O'Donoghue and Nilges
3 refinement CNS 1.1 Brunger, Adams, Clore, Gros, Nilges and Read
4 data analysis XEASY 1.3.13 Bartels et al.
5 processing NMRPipe 2.0 Delaglio, Grzesiek, Vuister, Zhu, Pfeifer and Bax