binding is believed to be the same in all these 3
enzymes.
Thank you,
Andrey
From: CCP4 bulletin board on behalf of Guillermo
Montoya
Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 10:32 AM
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] comparison of different
Dear all,
thanks for your
input
cheers!!
G.
On 1 Feb 2017, at 17:17, Debanu
mailto:debanu@gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear Xavier,
Great point and reminder!
Thanks,
Debanu
On Feb 1, 2017, at 6:44 AM, Boaz Shaanan
mailto:bshaa...@bgu.ac.il>> wrote:
Hi,
One possible (formal, I should say) wa
Dear Xavier,
Great point and reminder!
Thanks,
Debanu
> On Feb 1, 2017, at 6:44 AM, Boaz Shaanan wrote:
>
> Hi,
> One possible (formal, I should say) way around this would be to use one of
> the homology modeling servers (my favourite recently is phyre2 but go for any
> server you prefer) and
Hi,
One possible (formal, I should say) way around this would be to use one of the homology modeling servers (my favourite recently is phyre2 but go for any server you prefer) and feed it with the sequence of the protein in your structure as if you're trying
to get its structure in the''apo''
e apo form with unbound form
throughout the text except when dealing with forms lacking the catalytic
zinc ion.
Best regards,
Xavier
Forwarded Message
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] comparison of different protein states
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 22:23:27 -0800
From: Deban
Dear Guillermo,
I think the referee has a point because you are comparing two
different proteins to propose a model of 2 states even though the
enzymes are highly similar with conservation of key features. With 40%
id/60% similarity, even if core domain structure and length are
conserved, there ar
