Dataset Information

Detect, correct, retract: How to manage incorrect structural models.

ABSTRACT: The massive technical and computational progress of biomolecular crystallography has generated some adverse side effects. Most crystal structure models, produced by crystallographers or well-trained structural biologists, constitute useful sources of information, but occasional extreme outliers remind us that the process of structure determination is not fail-safe. The occurrence of severe errors or gross misinterpretations raises fundamental questions: Why do such aberrations emerge in the first place? How did they evade the sophisticated validation procedures which often produce clear and dire warnings, and why were severe errors not noticed by the depositors themselves, their supervisors, referees and editors? Once detected, what can be done to either correct, improve or eliminate such models? How do incorrect models affect the underlying claims or biomedical hypotheses they were intended, but failed, to support? What is the long-range effect of the propagation of such errors? And finally, what mechanisms can be envisioned to restore the validity of the scientific record and, if necessary, retract publications that are clearly invalidated by the lack of experimental evidence? We suggest that cognitive bias and flawed epistemology are likely at the root of the problem. By using examples from the published literature and from public repositories such as the Protein Data Bank, we provide case summaries to guide correction or improvement of structural models. When strong claims are unsustainable because of a deficient crystallographic model, removal of such a model and even retraction of the affected publication are necessary to restore the integrity of the scientific record.

SUBMITTER: Wlodawer A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5799025 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Detect, correct, retract: How to manage incorrect structural models.

Wlodawer Alexander A Dauter Zbigniew Z Porebski Przemyslaw J PJ Minor Wladek W Stanfield Robyn R Jaskolski Mariusz M Pozharski Edwin E Weichenberger Christian X CX Rupp Bernhard B

The FEBS journal 20171127 3

The massive technical and computational progress of biomolecular crystallography has generated some adverse side effects. Most crystal structure models, produced by crystallographers or well-trained structural biologists, constitute useful sources of information, but occasional extreme outliers remind us that the process of structure determination is not fail-safe. The occurrence of severe errors or gross misinterpretations raises fundamental questions: Why do such aberrations emerge in the firs ...[more]

PMID: 29113027

Similar Datasets

Project description:RNA polymerase (RNAP) is the primary machine responsible for transcription. Its ability to distinguish between correct (cognate) and incorrect (noncognate) nucleoside triphosphates (NTPs) is important for fidelity control in transcription. In this work, we investigated the substrate selection mechanism of T7 RNAP from the perspective of energetics. The dissociation free energies were determined for matched and unmatched base pairs in the preinsertion complex using the umbrella sampling method. A clear hydrogen-bond-rupture peak is observed in the potential of mean force curve for a matched base pair, whereas no such peaks are present in the position of mean force profiles for unmatched ones. The free-energy barrier could prevent correct substrates from being separated from the active site. Therefore, when NTPs diffuse into the active site, correct ones will stay for chemistry once they establish effective base pairing contacts with the template nucleotide, whereas incorrect ones will be withdrawn from the active site and rejected back to solution. This result provides an important energy evidence for the substrate selection mechanism of RNAP. Then we elucidated energetics and molecular details for correct NTP binding to the active site of the insertion complex. Our observations reveal that strong interactions act on the triphosphate of NTP to constrain its movement, whereas relatively weak interactions serve to position the base in the correct conformation. Triple interactions, hydrophobic contacts from residues M635 and Y639, base stacking from the 3' RNA terminal nucleotide, and base pairing from the template nucleotide act together to position the NTP base in a catalytically competent conformation. At last, we observed that incorrect NTPs cannot be as well-stabilized as the correct one in the active site when they are misincorporated in the insertion site. It is expected that our work can be helpful for comprehensively understanding details of this basic step in genetic transcription.

Dataset Information

Detect, correct, retract: How to manage incorrect structural models.

Publications

Detect, correct, retract: How to manage incorrect structural models.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets