Hi Phoebe,
Some of the info on Brian Shoichet's site might be of use. Worth a look
at least.
http://shoichetlab.compbio.ucsf.edu/
Anecdotally, I believe that gleevec was rationally designed from a
scaffold which bound one way, but after gleevec had been shown to be
effective, the X-ray structure revealed that it bound 'the wrong way'.
This is however a mismatch of prediction and reality, rather than two
different realities.
Cheers,
Charlie
[log in to unmask] wrote:
> A biochemist friend asked for examples of cases were a protein was
> co-crystallized with or soaked in a ligand that bound in the wrong place
> - say, because the ligand used wasn't quite the right one or because
> other important ligands were absent.
> I'm sure such examples are out there, especially when soaks were done at
> high concentrations, but I'm having trouble thinking of concrete examples.
> Help?
> thanks,
> Phoebe Rice
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Phoebe A. Rice
> Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
> The University of Chicago
> phone 773 834 1723
> fax 773 702 0439
> http://bmb.bsd.uchicago.edu/index.html
> http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multimedia/pia06064.html
> .
>
--
Charlie Bond
Professorial Fellow
University of Western Australia
School of Biomedical, Biomolecular and Chemical Sciences
M310
35 Stirling Highway
Crawley WA 6009
Australia
[log in to unmask]
+61 8 6488 4406
|