PSI Structural Biology Knowledgebase

PSI | Structural Biology Knowledgebase
Header Icons
E-Collection

Related Articles
Signaling: A Platform for Opposing Functions
May 2015
Protein Folding and Misfolding: It's the Journey, Not the Destination
March 2015
Molecular Portraits of the Cell
February 2015
Nuclear Pore Complex: A Flexible Transporter
February 2015
Nuclear Pore Complex: Higher Resolution of Macromolecules
February 2015
Nuclear Pore Complex: Integrative Approach to Probe Nup133
February 2015
Piecing Together the Nuclear Pore Complex
February 2015
Updating ModBase
January 2015
Transmembrane Spans
December 2014
Mining Protein Dynamics
May 2014
Novel Proteins and Networks: Assigning Function
May 2014
Cancer Networks: Predicting Catalytic Residues from 3D Protein Structures
November 2013
The Immune System: A Brotherhood of Immunoglobulins
June 2013
The Immune System: Super Cytokines
June 2013
Infectious Diseases: Targeting Meningitis
May 2013
PDZ Domains
April 2013
Protein Interaction Networks: Adding Structure to Protein Networks
April 2013
Design and Discovery: Flexible Backbone Protein Redesign
February 2013
Pocket changes
July 2012
Predictive protein origami
July 2012
Refining protein structure prediction
March 2012
Metal mates
February 2012
Devil is in the details
January 2012
Playing while you work
November 2011
Docking and rolling
October 2011
Fit to serve
October 2011
Rosetta hone
July 2011
Structure from sequence
July 2011
An easier solution for symmetry
June 2011
Solutions in the solution
June 2011
Regulating nitrogen assimilation
January 2011
Guard cells pick up the SLAC
December 2010
Alpha/Beta Barrels
October 2010
Modeling RNA structures
May 2010
Deducing function from small structural clues
February 2010
Spot the pore
January 2010
Network coverage
November 2009
GPCR modeling: any good?
August 2009
Protein modeling made easy
July 2009
Model proteins in your lunch break
April 2009
Click for cancer-protein interactions
December 2008
Modeling with SAXS
October 2008
Designing activity
September 2008

Technology Topics Modeling

Modeling RNA structures

PSI-SGKB [doi:10.1038/th_psisgkb.2010.19]
Technical Highlight - May 2010
Short description: The number of three-dimensional RNA structures is rapidly increasing, but are we getting close to being able to accurately predict new native structures?

A two-dimensional annotation and three-dimensional representation of a bulged-G motif from the sarcin-ricin loop from the Escherichia coli SRP domain IV RNA.

RNA is attracting a lot of attention and many groups have solved high-resolution three-dimensional structures of these molecules, although there are nowhere near the number of structures of RNA that there are of proteins. It would be very useful if we could reliably predict the structure of RNAs from their sequence — but how close are we to that point?

A recent paper by Rhiju Das and colleagues in Nature Methods presents a very promising approach to RNA modeling, based on the successful Rosetta method used for protein structures. It works, like the protein version, by assuming that the native structures have the lowest global energy.

The big improvements in this method over their earlier attempts are thanks to the addition of extensive new energy terms within the 'force fields'. Called fragment assembly of RNA with full-atom refinement (FARFAR), the new method defines terms for hydrogen bonding between bases and backbone oxygen atoms, and, importantly includes information about bonds between hydrogen and the hydroxyl O2' group (which is the difference between RNA and DNA). It also includes an energy term for C-H...O contacts, which contribute to the conformational preferences of the nucleotides and participate in the formation of some non-Watson–Crick base pairs.

FARFAR accurately modeled 50% of the 32 RNA motifs tested to a 1–2 Å resolution. This is no mean feat considering that the group focused on modeling conformations of non-canonical regions. The results are particularly encouraging because they correctly modeled non-Watson–Crick base pairs, which are used to form loops or junctions between helices and to connect RNA regions. These have been extremely difficult to model accurately up until now.

Atomic-resolution de novo prediction of RNA structures will enable the design and engineering of specific RNAs for nanotechnology or synthetic biology.

Related articles

Rosetta removes the NMR bottleneck

An X-ray ruler for investigating nucleic acid structure

Maria Hodges

References

  1. R. Das, J. Karanicolas & D. Baker Atomic accuracy in predicting and designing noncanonical RNA structure.
    Nature Methods 7, 291-294 (2010). doi:10.1038/nmeth.1433

Structural Biology Knowledgebase ISSN: 1758-1338
Funded by a grant from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health