Skip to main content
. 2012 Aug 7;103(3):541–549. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2012.06.042

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Comparisons of CaM in CaM-MA with CaM-peptide structures. (a) 44% D2O I(q) versus q for CaM-MA (▵) with CRYSON fits of the crystal structures of CaM (PDB:1CLL) (dotted line), and CaM taken from its structures in its complexes with Munc13 (PDB:2KDU) (solid line) and skMLCK (PDB:2BBM) (dashed line). (b) P(r) versus r for the experimental and modeled profiles shown in panel a using the same key.