Computational design of water-soluble α-helical barrels

By A. Thomson, Christopher W. Wood, A. Burton, G. Bartlett, R. Sessions, R. Brady, Derek N. Woolfson. 2014

302 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The coming of age of de novo protein design (2016, background): “4), including a peptide that binds to carbon nano-tubes 53 , parallel self-assembling helical channels 31 , an ion transporter 34 , cages 54 and an α-helical barrel with installed hydrolytic activity 55 .”
De novo protein design, a retrospective (2020, background): “…al., 2005), Triosephosphate isomerase (TIM) barrels (Huang et al., 2016b), β-barrels (Dou et al., 2018), β-propellers (Voet et al., 2014), coiled coils (Harbury et al., 1998; Huang et al., 2014; Thomson et al., 2014), and repeat proteins (Brunette et al., 2015), as discussed in subsequent sections.”
Essentials of de novo protein design: Methods and applications (2018, methodology): “31 De novo protein design though parametric approaches has proven to be an excellent method for the design of helical bundles of exceptional stability 32 (see Figure 2f ) and α -helical barrels with central pores of various sizes 33 (see Figure 2g).”
Achievements and Challenges in Computational Protein Design. (2017, methodology): “In 2014 Woolfson applied CPD for designing water-soluble α-helical barrels [114].”
Tertiary alphabet for the observable protein structural universe (2016, background): “Geometric parameters in natural coiled coils fall within well-defined ranges (10), also corresponding to structures designed either de novo or rationally (52 – 54).”