Table 1.
Electron density-based validation of protein–ligand models
Scores | Classification | Remedy | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
RSCC | % of structures |
Predicted number of PDB |
Twilight | VHELIBS | |
1.0–0.9 | 67 | ~46,900 | Ligand fits density | ‘Good’ | Ligand model good to use |
<0.9–0.8 | 21 | ~14,700 | Ligand fits density partially | ‘Dubious’ | Ligand over-modeled or may benefit from further refinement |
<0.8–0.7 | 7 | ~4,900 | Significant parts of ligand not in density | ‘Bad’ | Use ligand model with caution! |
<0.7–0.6 | 3 | ~2,100 | Very poor fit of ligand to density | ||
<0.6–0.5 | 1 | ~700 | Improbably poor fit of ligand to density, density almost absent | ||
<0.5 | 1 | ~700 | Catastrophic fit of ligand to density, density completely absent |
Real Space Correlation Coefficient (RSCC) values were calculated using Twilight [12, 15] and classifications determined using Twilight and VHELIBS [14]. The percentage of structures was determined using a curated set of 382,588 ligands from the PDB with electron density available in the EDS [20]. Pre-calculated data available for download from http://bit.ly/1shcwu4. The predicted number of PDB entries was calculated using the percentage of ligands in each category in the curated set and applying to the total PDB count (just over 70,000 protein–ligand models in the PDB as of Nov, 2014). This is likely a conservative estimate based on the assumption that each PDB files contains just one ligand