SOLUTION NMR Experimental Data


Experimental Details
Sample Conditions
Sample Contents6 mM P22 Cro, 50 mM sodium phosphate buffer, 90% H2O, 10% D2O
Solvent90% H2O/10% D2O
Ionic Strength50 mM sodium phosphate
pH6.4
Pressureambient
Temperature (K)293
Experiment(s):2D NOESY
Sample Contents3.5 mM P22 Cro U-15N, 50 mM sodium phosphate buffer, 90% H2O, 10% D2O
Solvent90% H2O/10% D2O
Ionic Strength50 mM sodium phosphate
pH6.4
Pressureambient
Temperature (K)293
Experiment(s):HNHA, HNHB, 3D_15N-separated_NOESY
Sample Contents2.75 mM P22 Cro U-15N, 13C, 50 mM sodium phosphate buffer, 90% H2O, 10% D2O
Solvent90% H2O/10% D2O
Ionic Strength50 mM sodium phosphate
pH6.4
Pressureambient
Temperature (K)293
Experiment(s):3D_13C-separated_NOESY
Sample Contents3.5 mM P22 Cro U-15N, 50 mM sodium phosphate buffer, 100% D2O
Solvent100% D2O
Ionic Strength50 mM sodium phosphate
pH6.4
Pressureambient
Temperature (K)293
Experiment(s):hydrogen exchange
Spectrometer Information
Manufacturer Model Field Strength
Bruker DRX 600.0
NMR Refinement
Method simulated annealing
Details 30 structures were calculated using 916 NOE-derived distance restraints, 10 hydrogen bond distance restraints, 41 phi angle restraints and 5 chi1 angle restraints. 23 of 30 calculated structures were initially accepted based on no distance restraint violations greater than 0.4 angstroms and no angle restraint violations greater than 5 degrees. Of the 23, 2 were eliminated for having significantly higher energy than the others, leaving 21 structures in the final ensemble. The ordered region of the structure includes residues 1-57. Pairwise RMSDs for the ordered region were 0.53 A (backbone atoms) and 1.29 A (all heavy atoms). None of the backbone angles in the ordered region of any ensemble member fell outside the most favorable and additionally allowed regions of a Ramachandran plot.
NMR Ensemble Information
Conformer Selection Criteria agreement with distance and angle restraints; two structures were also eliminated due to high energy
Conformers Calculated Total Number 30
Conformers Submitted Total Number 21
Representative Model Choice Rationale
1 closest to the average
Computation: NMR Software
# Classification Software Name Author
1 collection version: 3.1 XWINNMR Bruker
2 processing NMRPipe F. Delaglio et al
3 data analysis version: 4.1.3 NMRView B. Johnson
4 structure solution version: 1.1 CNS A. Brunger et al
5 refinement version: 1.1 CNS A. Brunger et al