Hello Ben thank you for your kind update:).
In my case which tutorial should I follow for this loop refinement:
1.)
Modeling with cryo-EM
------------------------------
Step 7: Refine models with loop modeling
or,
2.)
Loop refiningThe loop optimization method relies on a scoring function and
optimization schedule adapted for loop modeling. It is used automatically
to refine comparative models if you use the *LoopModel* class rather than
*AutoModel*; see the example below.
# Loop refinement of an existing model
from modeller import *
from modeller.automodel import *
log.verbose()
env = Environ()
# directories for input atom files
env.io.atom_files_directory = ['.', '../atom_files']
# Create a new class based on 'LoopModel' so that we can redefine
# select_loop_atoms (necessary)
class MyLoop(LoopModel):
# This routine picks the residues to be refined by loop modeling
def select_loop_atoms(self):
# 10 residue insertion
return Selection(self.residue_range('273:A', '283:A'))
m = MyLoop(env,
inimodel='TvLDH-mult.pdb', # initial model of the target
sequence='TvLDH') # code of the target
m.loop.starting_model= 1 # index of the first loop model
m.loop.ending_model = 10 # index of the last loop model
m.loop.md_level = refine.very_fast # loop refinement method; this yields
# models quickly but of low quality;
# use refine.slow for better models
m.make()
or should I try both?
Thanks:)
Joel
On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 12:09 AM Modeller Caretaker <
> wrote:
> On 9/20/22 8:52 AM, Joel Subach via modeller_usage wrote:
> > Hi, I loop missing residue MODELLER modeled a heptamer both
> > unrestrained and restrained with the former exhibiting an RMSD
> > of 0.295 while the restrained exhibited an RMSD of 0.0.
> >
> > The restrained model´s missing residue loops, however, are too
> > dynamic and seem to be broken when visualized via Pymol.
> > Accordingly, is there a way to generate the restrained version to
> > exhibit intact loops so that I may keep this version because of its
> > 0.0 RMSD?
>
> When you have regions like this that are not aligned with a template,
> the only restraints on them in standard comparative modeling are from
> the CHARMM forcefield. This will attempt to generate sensible
> stereochemistry, but if you want more native-looking loops, you'll want
> to refine them using the loop modeling protocol. You have long loops
> though - you'll definitely need to build at least several hundred loop
> models. If they still look too constrained, you might consider
> broadening the residue range in your selection to include a few residues
> either side of the loop.
>
> Ben Webb, Modeller Caretaker
> --
> https://salilab.org/modeller/
> Modeller mail list: https://salilab.org/mailman/listinfo/modeller_usage
>
Hello Ben thank you for your kind update: ). In my case which tutorial should I follow for this loop refinement: 1. ) Modeling with cryo-EM Step 7: Refine models with loop modeling or, 2. ) Loop refining The loop optimization method relies on
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
Hello Ben thank you for your kind update:).
In my case which tutorial should I follow for this loop refinement:
1.)Â Â
Modeling with cryo-EM
Step 7: Refine models with loop modeling
or,
2.)Â
Loop refining
The loop optimization method relies on a scoring function and optimization schedule adapted for loop modeling. It is used automatically to refine comparative models if you use the LoopModel class rather than AutoModel; see the example below.
# Loop refinement of an existing model
from modeller import *
from modeller.automodel import *
log.verbose()
env = Environ()
# directories for input atom files
env.io.atom_files_directory = ['.', '../atom_files']
# Create a new class based on 'LoopModel' so that we can redefine
# select_loop_atoms (necessary)
class MyLoop(LoopModel):
# This routine picks the residues to be refined by loop modeling
def select_loop_atoms(self):
# 10 residue insertion
return Selection(self.residue_range('273:A', '283:A'))
m = MyLoop(env,
inimodel='TvLDH-mult.pdb', # initial model of the target
sequence='TvLDH') # code of the target
m.loop.starting_model= 1 # index of the first loop model
m.loop.ending_model = 10 # index of the last loop model
m.loop.md_level = refine.very_fast # loop refinement method; this yields
# models quickly but of low quality;
# use refine.slow for better models
m.make()
 or should I try both?
Thanks:)
Joel ð???
On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 12:09 AM Modeller Caretaker <">> wrote:
On 9/20/22 8:52 AM, Joel Subach via modeller_usage wrote:
> Hi, I loop missing residue MODELLER modeled a heptamer both
> unrestrained and restrained with the former exhibiting an RMSD
> of 0.295 while the restrained exhibited an RMSD of 0.0.
>
> The restrained model´s missing residue loops, however, are too
> dynamic and seem to be broken when visualized via Pymol.
> Accordingly, is there a way to generate the restrained version to
> exhibit intact loops so that I may keep this version because of its
> 0.0 RMSD?
When you have regions like this that are not aligned with a template,
the only restraints on them in standard comparative modeling are from
the CHARMM forcefield. This will attempt to generate sensible
stereochemistry, but if you want more native-looking loops, you'll want
to refine them using the loop modeling protocol. You have long loops
though - you'll definitely need to build at least several hundred loop
models. If they still look too constrained, you might consider
broadening the residue range in your selection to include a few residues
either side of the loop.