Skip to main content
. 2005 Feb 18;88(5):3109–3117. doi: 10.1529/biophysj.104.058453

TABLE 2.

Summary of results from both ideal and nonideal tests

Nonideal test result
Ideal test result
Test 1
Test 2
PDB codes Mode No. (overlap) Pool size No. pairs Overlap No. pairs Overlap No. pairs Overlap
8adh 6adh No. 3(0.680) 49
10 0.564 8 0.622(0.100) 10 0.528(0.081)
4 0.300
1avr 1avh No. 2(0.412) 14 2 0.538 9 0.423(0.134)
3 0.550 9 0.423(0.134) 1 0.406(0.000)
3 0.455
4dfr 5dfr No. 1(0.611) 9
2 0.588 9 0.390(0.000) 3 0.297(0.308)
1 0.612
1ddt 1mdt No. 2(0.564) 147 1 0.640 2 0.607(0.067) 1 0.640(0.000)
7 0.650 9 0.646(0.011) 7 0.650(0.000)
2 0.421
3enl 7enl No. 1(0.345) 49 1 0.499 8 0.366(0.107) 1 0.499(0.000)
10 0.500 8 0.366(0.107) 10 0.500(0.003)
1 0.346
1hhp 1ajx No. 3(0.70) 6 1 0.784
1 0.784 5 0.187(0.069) 1 0.517(0.589)
1 0.068
1lfh 1lfg No. 1(0.613) 62 1 0.671 5 0.620(0.236) 1 0.671(0.000)
8 0.882 10 0.737(0.170) 10 0.867(0.025)
4 0.663
2lao 1lst No. 1(0.886) 40 1 0.932 1 0.918(0.028) 1 0.932(0.000)
3 0.942 10 0.937(0.006) 3 0.942(0.000)
3 0.920
3tms 2tsc No. 4(0.503) 15 4 0.563 2 0.536(0.133) 4 0.556(0.040)
7 0.664 10 0.648(0.025) 7 0.637(0.043)
1 0.438
1ypt 1yts No. 6(0.470) 23 1 0.662 1 0.626(0.117) 1 0.662(0.000)
9 0.759 10 0.756(0.020) 9 0.754(0.014)
1 0.383
1l3s 1lv5 No. 5(0.696) 56 5 0.704 5 0.695(0.044)
7 0.719 10 0.633(0.174) 7 0.710(0.026)
6 0.103
1bpx 1bpy No. 1(0.710) 31 1 0.755 3 0.756(0.103) 1 0.755(0.000)
7 0.759 10 0.807(0.038) 8 0.759(0.001)
1 0.711
1ih7 1ig9 No. 2(0.804) 82 1 0.815 3 0.809(0.110) 1 0.815(0.000)
5 0.817 10 0.874(0.017) 5 0.817(0.000)
1 0.058
2ktq 3ktq No. 4(0.504) 40 1 0.755 4 0.564(0.295) 1 0.755(0.000)
10 0.790 10 0.710(0.167) 10 0.786(0.024)
1 0.116
4q21 5p21 No. 2(0.494) 29 1 0.579 8 0.499(0.109) 2 0.590(0.047)
10 0.660 10 0.515(0.091) 9 0.615(0.061)
3 0.191
1tag 1tnd No. 3(0.385) 49 1 0.478 3 0.405(0.185) 1 0.478(0.000)
9 0.531 10 0.572(0.096) 9 0.526(0.012)
2 0.217
9aat 1ama No. 6(0.515) 37 4 0.545
No. 7(0.459) 8 0.604 9 0.505(0.153) 8 0.491(0.100)
5 0.210
1cll 1ctr No. 5(0.405) 28 1 0.695 1 0.484(0.119) 1 0.695(0.000)
No. 4(0.380) 1 0.695 8 0.578(0.057) 1 0.695(0.000)
2 0.313
1hil 1him No. 4(0.598) 13 1 0.684 10 0.664(0.198)
No. 1(0.460) 6 0.809 10 0.664(0.198) 8 0.479(0.384)
1 0.477
1omp 1anf No. 2(0.675) 60 1 0.711 3 0.765(0.184) 1 0.711(0.000)
No. 1(0.650) 8 0.861 10 0.862(0.069) 8 0.857(0.010)
2 0.823
1dfl 1kk7 No. 1(0.518) 102 1 0.638 5 0.516(0.217) 1 0.638(0.000)
No. 3(0.475) 10 0.813 10 0.657(0.109) 10 0.800(0.015)
1 0.518
1vom 1mma No. 1(0.558) 89 1 0.734 7 0.561(0.172) 1 0.734(0.000)
No. 2(0.371) 2 0.752 10 0.618(0.086) 2 0.752(0.001)
2 0.674

For each test case, the first row shows the minimal number of pairs needed to match the maximal overlap between any single mode and the measured conformational change; the second row shows the number of pairs when the maximal overlap between the computed and the measured conformational changes is obtained. For the two nonideal tests, both the average overlap and its standard deviation (inside parentheses) are shown. For the ideal test, the third row shows the corresponding result for the “hard constraint” method as a comparison.