SOLUTION NMR Experimental Data


Experimental Details
Sample Conditions
Sample Contents1.0 mM [U-100% 13C; U-100% 15N] YT682A, 20 mM MES, 100 mM sodium chloride, 5 mM calcium chloride, 10 mM DTT, 0.02 % sodium azide, 50 uM DSS, 95% H2O/5% D2O
Solvent95% H2O/5% D2O
Ionic Strengthn/a
pH6.5
Pressureambient
Temperature (K)298
Experiment(s):2D 1H-15N HSQC, 3D HCCH-TOCSY, 3D (H)CCH-COSY aliphatic, 3D (H)CCH-COSY aromatic, 1D 15N T1, 1D 15N T2, 2D 1H-13C CT-HSQC aliphatic, 3D HNCO, 3D CBCA(CO)NH, 3D HNCACB, 3D HBHA(CO)NH, 3D simutaneous 13C-aromatic,13C-aliphatic,15N edited 1H-1H NOESY, 3D HN(CA)CO, 2D 1H-13C CT-HSQC aromatic
Sample Contents1.1 mM [5% 13C; U-100% 15N] YT682A, 20 mM MES, 100 mM sodium chloride, 5 mM calcium chloride, 10 mM DTT, 0.02 % sodium azide, 50 uM DSS, 95% H2O/5% D2O
Solvent95% H2O/5% D2O
Ionic Strengthn/a
pH6.5
Pressureambient
Temperature (K)298
Experiment(s):2D 1H-13C CT-HSQC methyl, 2D J-resolved 1H-15N HSQC
Sample Contents0.7 mM [5% 13C; U-100% 15N] YT682A, 20 mM MES, 100 mM sodium chloride, 5 mM calcium chloride, 10 mM DTT, 0.02 % sodium azide, 50 uM DSS, 4 % C12E5 PEG, 4 % hexanol, 90% H2O/10% D2O
Solvent90% H2O/10% D2O
Ionic Strengthn/a
pH6.5
Pressureambient
Temperature (K)298
Experiment(s):2D J-resolved 1H-15N HSQC
Sample Contents1.1 mM [5% 13C; U-100% 15N] YT682A, 20 mM MES, 100 mM sodium chloride, 5 mM calcium chloride, 10 mM DTT, 0.02 % sodium azide, 50 uM DSS, 90% H2O/10% D2O
Solvent90% H2O/10% D2O
Ionic Strengthn/a
pH6.5
Pressureambient
Temperature (K)298
Experiment(s):2D J-resolved 1H-15N HSQC
Spectrometer Information
Manufacturer Model Field Strength
Varian INOVA 600.0
Varian INOVA 750.0
Varian INOVA 600.0
NMR Refinement
Method simulated annealing
Details Structure determination was performed by running CYANA and ASDP in parallel using NOE-based constraints and PHI and PSI dihedral angle constraints from TALOS+. Consensus peak assignments were selected and used in iterative refinement with CYANA, with RDC constraints added at later stages. The 20 conformers out of 100 with the lowest target function were further refined by simulated annealing in explicit water bath using the program CNS with PARAM19 force field
NMR Ensemble Information
Conformer Selection Criteria target function
Conformers Calculated Total Number 100
Conformers Submitted Total Number 20
Representative Model Choice Rationale
1 lowest energy
Computation: NMR Software
# Classification Software Name Author
1 refinement, structure solution, geometry optimization version: 1.2 CNS Brunger, Adams, Clore, Gros, Nilges and Read
2 refinement, geometry optimization, structure solution version: 3.0 CYANA Guntert, Mumenthaler and Wuthrich
3 data analysis, refinement version: 1.0 ASDP Huang, Tejero, Powers and Montelione
4 data analysis, chemical shift assignment version: 2.3.0 AutoAssign Zimmerman, Moseley, Kulikowski and Montelione
5 processing NMRPipe Delaglio, Grzesiek, Vuister, Zhu, Pfeifer and Bax
6 data analysis version: 1.3.13 XEASY Bartels et al.
7 processing version: 6.4 PROSA Guntert
8 collection version: 2.2D VNMRJ Varian
9 geometry optimization TALOS+ Shen, Cornilescu, Delaglio and Bax
10 data analysis,peak picking,chemical shift assignment version: 1.8.4 CARA Keller and Wuthrich
11 refinement CNS Brunger, Adams, Clore, Gros, Nilges and Read