|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| [[Image:1d9c.jpg|left|200px]] | | {{Seed}} |
| | [[Image:1d9c.png|left|200px]] |
|
| |
|
| <!-- | | <!-- |
| Line 9: |
Line 10: |
| {{STRUCTURE_1d9c| PDB=1d9c | SCENE= }} | | {{STRUCTURE_1d9c| PDB=1d9c | SCENE= }} |
|
| |
|
| '''BOVINE INTERFERON-GAMMA AT 2.0 ANGSTROMS'''
| | ===BOVINE INTERFERON-GAMMA AT 2.0 ANGSTROMS=== |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| ==Overview==
| | <!-- |
| The structure of bovine interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) was determined by multiple isomorphous replacement at 2.0 A resolution. Bovine IFN-gamma crystallizes in two related crystal forms. Crystal form 1 diffracts to 2.9 A resolution and is reproducible and stable to derivatization. Crystal form 2 diffracts to 2.0 A resolution, but shows significant non-isomorphism from crystal to crystal. The previously determined structures of several different species of INF-gamma were either at too low a resolution [human, 1hig; Ealick et al. (1991), Science, 252, 698-702] or were too inaccurate [bovine, 1rfb; Samudzi & Rubin (1993), Acta Cryst. D49(6), 505-512; rabbit, 2rig; Samudzi et al. (1991), J. Biol. Chem. 266(32), 21791-21797] for the structure to be solved by molecular replacement. The structure was solved in crystal form 1 using two derivatives produced by chemically modifying two free cysteine residues that were introduced by site-directed mutagenesis (Ser30Cys, Asn59Cys). After model building and refinement, the final R value was 21.8% (R(free) = 30.9%) for all data in the resolution range 8.0-2.9 A. The crystal form 1 structure was then used as a molecular-replacement model for crystal form 2 data collected from a flash-cooled crystal. Subsequent model building and refinement, using all data in the resolution range 15.0-2.0 A, gave an R value of 19.7% and an R(free) of 27.5%. Pairwise comparison of C(alpha) positions of bovine IFN-gamma (BOV) and the previously determined 1rfb and 2rig structures indicated some significant differences in the models (r.m.s.d. values for BOV to 1rfb, 4.3 A; BOV to 2rig, 4.0 A). An assessment of the quality of the structures was made using the 3D-1D algorithm [Eisenberg et al. (1992), Faraday Discuss. 93, 25-34]. The resulting statistical scoring indicated that BOV was consistent with expected criteria for a 2.0 A structure, whereas both 1rfb and 2rig fell below acceptable criteria.
| | The line below this paragraph, {{ABSTRACT_PUBMED_10666622}}, adds the Publication Abstract to the page |
| | (as it appears on PubMed at http://www.pubmed.gov), where 10666622 is the PubMed ID number. |
| | --> |
| | {{ABSTRACT_PUBMED_10666622}} |
|
| |
|
| ==About this Structure== | | ==About this Structure== |
| Line 25: |
Line 29: |
| [[Category: Randal, M.]] | | [[Category: Randal, M.]] |
| [[Category: Helical homodimer]] | | [[Category: Helical homodimer]] |
| ''Page seeded by [http://oca.weizmann.ac.il/oca OCA ] on Fri May 2 13:35:36 2008'' | | |
| | ''Page seeded by [http://oca.weizmann.ac.il/oca OCA ] on Mon Jun 30 22:42:02 2008'' |
