Issue with Loop Analyzer Mover ouput

Member Site › Forums › Rosetta 3 › Rosetta 3 – General › Issue with Loop Analyzer Mover ouput

Viewing 2 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • April 30, 2018 at 4:55 pm #2905
      Anonymous

        Dear Rosetta Users,

        I am trying to design a loop present in a protein-protein interface. At the end of my design protocol, I inserted a LoopAnalyzerMover to assess the output decoys. To my dismay, I find very high LAM score, for all loop designs. An example LAM output is below:

        +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

        LoopAnalyzerMover: unweighted bonded terms and angles (in degrees)

        position phi_angle psi_angle omega_angle peptide_bond_C-N_distance rama_score omega_score dunbrack_score peptide_bond_score chainbreak_score

         pos phi_ang psi_ang omega_ang pbnd_dst    rama  omega_sc dbrack pbnd_sc   cbreak

         187  -106.2   151.7       178    1.339  -0.122    0.0155  0.2082.82e+04      0.6

         188   -71.4   161.7    -178.2    1.329  -0.811     0.246      0   -3.17   0.0414

         189  -130.5   60.51       174    1.329   0.825     0.939   1.86   -3.43    0.357

         190  -74.16   166.9     169.8    1.329  -0.599     0.495   0.22   -3.43     1.14

         191  -60.36  -16.81     178.3    1.329   -0.73    -0.249  0.977   -3.43     3.24

         192  -88.43   165.3    -168.7     1.33  -0.234      2.83  0.139   -3.42      1.2

         193  -88.68  -5.647    -171.9    1.328  -0.956     0.572   1.17   -3.42    0.631

         194  -123.4   82.26    -178.5    1.328   0.902     0.126   3.04   -3.44    0.169

         195  -78.86     156     162.2    1.328  -0.791      2.03 0.0889   -3.44     2.92

         196  -83.83   151.7     175.5    1.338   -0.67 -0.000213      0   -3.21     1.87

         197  -109.7   121.8    -164.4    1.343  0.0111      3.51  0.7972.82e+04     5.94

        total_rama -3.17431

        total_omega 10.5213

        total_peptide_bond 56327.8

        total_chainbreak 18.1063

        total rama+omega+peptide bond+chainbreak 56353.2

        LAM_total 56353.2

        +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

        As per my analysis, the peptide bond score for the starting and ending residues of the loop seem to be the problem.  The loop geometry seems fine to me though. Since, this issue is observed in all the output decoys, I am not sure what is the source of the problem.

        Some additional info:

        Rosetta Scripts LAM tag:

        <LoopAnalyzerMover name=”loopAnalysis”>

                    <Loop start=”188″ stop=”196″/>

         </LoopAnalyzerMover>

        Note that the loop region is from residues188-196 and it is flanked by cysteine residues (187 and 197) that form a disulphide bond. Could this high score be due to the disulphide bond?

        Some insights will be very helpful.  Thanks in advance.

         

         

      • April 30, 2018 at 5:32 pm #14212
        Anonymous

          You’re definitely right that it’s upset about the peptide bond score.

          I like your hypothesis that the disulfide is tripping it up.  I looked at the code expecting to find some misused indexing that doesn’t account for disulfides/termini/etc, but it appears to just be looking for the N and C atoms directly (I am looking at the file PeptideBondEnergy.cc).  It still smells like the disulfides are the problem.

          In LoopAnalyzerMover the peptide bond energies are not calculated against the mock poses created to score the chainbreaks – that was my second hypothesis.

          The pbnd score is on a gaussian with these settings:

              Real const mean( 1.325883 );

              Real const sdev( 0.012547 );

          The printed distances are like 2 SDs out, clearly not 10K energy units out.  

          _____

          So what should you do?  Well, LoopAnalyzerMover exists to highlight things I found wrong when doing loop designs many years ago.  It’s just meant to raise alarms on  things the normal scorefunction doesn’t notice (like bond length geometry errors).  If LAM isn’t working here – ignore it!  Reanalyze on only the 188-196 region perhaps.  Check out the cart_bonded score as an alternative that will check on bond lengths.  I’ll file a bug report about this in the meantime, but exactly where the bug is, is not obvious.

        • May 1, 2018 at 5:54 am #14213
          Anonymous

            Thank you smlewis for the quick response. It seems logical to try and rerun this on the loop excluding the cysteines; will do as you suggested.

        • Author
          Posts
        Viewing 2 reply threads
        • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.