Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Jan 12.
Published in final edited form as: Nature. 2016 Nov 14;541(7636):242–246. doi: 10.1038/nature20599

Extended Data Table 2.

R.m.s.d. values of all atoms among apo and ligand-bound conformers

Structures aligned with the kissing loops

3-way jct. P1* U48 U51 U74 Hinge Latch Kissing loops

apo2 vs. 4TZX 6.4 6.5 13.3 10.1 2.8 5.9 7.5 0.8
apo1 vs. 4TZX 6.2 10.3 11.5 10.0 2.8 7.8 6.8 0.8
apo1 vs. apo2 3.4 6.4 2.8 4.7 1.7 7.2 2.0 0.5
apo1 vs. IB 3.5 5.0 2.3 4.8 1.6 6.4 2.0 0.8
apo2 vs. IB 1.3 1.4 2.4 0.4 0.6 2.5 0.8 0.3
IB vs. 4TZX 5.6 6.6 12.2 9.9 3.2 5.4 6.5 0.89

Whole structure alignments

3-way jct. P1* U48 U51 U74 Hinge Latch Kissing loops

apo2 vs. 4TZX 5.6 2.5 10.6 10.0 2.3 1.6 4.9 0.9
apo1 vs. 4TZX 5.6 3.4 7.9 10.6 2.3 1.7 4.8 0.8
apo1 vs. apo2 3.6 1.5 2.6 2.0 1.6 2.4 1.4 0.3
apo1 vs. IB 3.3 3.8 2.3 3.9 1.8 6.2 1.8 1.1
apo2 vs. IB 1.3 1.3 2.4 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.8 0.3
IB vs. 4TZX 5.5 4.1 10.7 10.9 2.4 5.1 6.4 1.4
*

The r.m.s.d. values (Å) of P1 when compared alone are among the three structures:

1.3 Å (apo2 versus bound); 0.9 Å (apo1 versus bound); 1.0 Å (apo2 versus apo1); 1.4 Å (IB versus bound); 1.3 Å (IB versus apo1); 1.3 Å (IB versus apo2).