Undergraduates improve upon published crystal structure in class assignment
Open accessAbstract
Recently, 57 undergraduate students at the University of Michigan were assigned the task of solving a crystal structure, given only the electron density map of a 1.3 Å crystal structure from the electron density server, and the position of the N‐terminal amino acid. To test their knowledge of amino acid chemistry, the students were not given the protein sequence. With minimal direction from the instructor on how the students should complete the assignment, the students fared remarkably well in this task, with over half the class able to reconstruct the original sequence with over 77% sequence identity, and with structures whose median ranked in the 91st percentile of all structures of comparable resolution in terms of structure quality. Fourteen percent of the students' structures produced Molprobity steric clash validation scores even better than that of the original structure, suggesting that multiple students achieved an improvement in the overall structure quality compared to the published structure. Students were able to delineate limiting case chemical environments, such as charged interactions or complete solvent exposure, but were less able to distinguish finer details of hydrogen bonding or hydrophobicity. Our results prompt several questions: why were students able to perform so well in their structural validation scores? How were some students able to outperform the 88% sequence identity mark that would constitute a perfect score, given the level of degenerate density or surface residues with poor density? And how can the methodology used by the best students inform the practices of professional X‐ray crystallographers? © 2014 by The International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 42(5):398–404, 2014.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
As a preliminary test, Foldit players were able to improve on the published scytovirin structure.
“As a preliminary test of this feature, we gave an electron density puzzle to the Foldit players that was nearly identical to the lectin scytovirin classroom assignment mentioned above, and found that the Foldit players were also able to improve on the published scytovirin structure (Supplementary Note 1; Supplementary Fig. 2).”
From Determining crystal structures through crowdsourcing and coursework (2016) · cites this paper as [4]
In a class assignment, about 10% of 57 undergraduate students improved on the previously published model of lectin scytovirin.
“In addition to learning about protein structure, ∼10% of these students improved on the previously published model4.”
From Determining crystal structures through crowdsourcing and coursework (2016) · cites this paper as [4]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Determining crystal structures through crowdsourcing and coursework
Horowitz, S., Koepnick, B., Martin, R., Tymieniecki, A., Winburn, A. A., Cooper, S., Flatten, J., Rogawski, D. S., Koropatkin, N. M., Hailu, T. T., et al. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms12549 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Horowitz, S., Koldewey, P., & Bardwell, J. C.
- Affiliations
- Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- Horowitz, Scott
- Venue
- Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-07-18
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 398-404
- ISSN
- 1470-8175 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-3429
- OpenAlex
- W2144746918
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 0.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Howard Hughes Medical Institute
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Enzyme Structure and Function
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- protein structure determination, electron density maps, undergraduate research, protein structure reconstruction, amino acid chemistry, structural validation, MolProbity, sequence reconstruction, learning outcomes
- MeSH terms
- Amino Acid Sequence, Amino Acids, Crystallization, Curriculum, Humans, Motivation, Proteins, Surveys and Questionnaires, Students, Teaching, Universities, Reproducibility of Results, Crystallography, X-Ray, Problem-Based Learning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review