Table 2.
Predicted stability impact of MC4R variants using multiple estimation tools.
| No. | Variant | mCSM (ΔΔG) | SDM (ΔΔG) | DUET (ΔΔG) | ENCoM (ΔΔG) | DynaMut (ΔΔG) | Stability Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | A259V | +0.54 | −0.61 | +0.83 | +0.38 | +1.22 | Mixed |
| 2 | E100K | −0.37 | −1.22 | −0.24 | +0.45 | +0.76 | Destabilizing |
| 3 | G233S | −0.68 | −0.95 | −0.51 | +0.00 | +0.09 | Destabilizing |
| 4 | G98R | −0.83 | −2.59 | −0.89 | +0.80 | +0.16 | Destabilizing |
| 5 | I173M | −0.64 | −0.43 | −0.52 | +0.03 | +0.62 | Destabilizing |
| 6 | M79T | −1.97 | −0.86 | −1.65 | −0.57 | −0.98 | Strongly destabilizing |
| 7 | N294S | −1.33 | −1.66 | −1.45 | −0.18 | −0.23 | Strongly destabilizing |
| 8 | Q307E | −0.17 | +1.14 | +0.54 | −0.02 | +0.25 | Mixed |
| 9 | R220G | −0.93 | −0.85 | −0.96 | −0.42 | −1.00 | Strongly destabilizing |
| 10 | T112M | +0.26 | +0.63 | +0.43 | +0.07 | +0.14 | Stabilizing |
| 11 | V228L | −0.28 | +0.39 | +0.22 | −0.11 | +0.08 | Mixed |
| 12 | Y187C | −0.32 | +0.10 | −0.11 | −0.22 | −0.06 | Destabilizing |
ΔΔG values are expressed in kcal/mol. Negative values indicate destabilizing effects, while positive values indicate stabilizing effects. The overall stability trend was determined based on the consensus of multiple prediction tools.