SOLUTION NMR Experimental Data


Experimental Details
Sample Conditions
Sample Contents2.6 mM entity-1, 94% H2O/6% D2O
Solvent94% H2O/6% D2O
Ionic Strengthn/a
pH2.9
Pressureambient
Temperature (K)278
Experiment(s):2D 1H-13C HSQC, 2D 1H-1H TOCSY, 2D 1H-1H NOESY
Sample Contents2.6 mM entity-1, 94% H2O/6% D2O
Solvent94% H2O/6% D2O
Ionic Strengthn/a
pH2.9
Pressuren/a
Temperature (K)283
Experiment(s):2D 1H-15N HSQC
Sample Contents2.6 mM entity-1, 94% H2O/6% D2O
Solvent94% H2O/6% D2O
Ionic Strengthn/a
pH4.8
Pressuren/a
Temperature (K)278
Experiment(s):2D 1H-1H TOCSY, 2D DQF-COSY, 2D 1H-1H NOESY
Sample Contents2.3 mM entity-2, 100% D2O
Solvent100% D2O
Ionic Strengthn/a
pH5.3
Pressuren/a
Temperature (K)278
Experiment(s):2D 1H-1H TOCSY, 2D 1H-1H NOESY
Spectrometer Information
Manufacturer Model Field Strength
Bruker Avance 500.0
Bruker DRX 600.0
NMR Refinement
Method simulated annealing
NMR Ensemble Information
Conformer Selection Criteria structures with the lowest energy
Conformers Calculated Total Number 200
Conformers Submitted Total Number 20
Representative Model Choice Rationale
1 closest to the average
Computation: NMR Software
# Classification Software Name Author
1 collection TOPSPIN Bruker Biospin
2 processing TOPSPIN Bruker Biospin
3 chemical shift assignment XEASY Bartels et al.
4 peak picking XEASY Bartels et al.
5 structure solution CYANA Guntert, Mumenthaler and Wuthrich
6 geometry optimization X-PLOR_NIH Schwieters, Kuszewski, Tjandra and Clore
7 refinement X-PLOR_NIH Schwieters, Kuszewski, Tjandra and Clore
8 data analysis ProcheckNMR Laskowski and MacArthur