Cited by 72Advanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and ApplicationsEnzyme Structure and FunctionProtein Structure and Dynamics

Cryo‐EM model validation using independent map reconstructions

Open access
DiMaio, Frank, Zhang, Junjie, Chiu, Wah, Baker, David·2013·Protein Science

Abstract

An increasing number of cryo‐electron microscopy (cryo‐EM) density maps are being generated with suitable resolution to trace the protein backbone and guide sidechain placement. Generating and evaluating atomic models based on such maps would be greatly facilitated by independent validation metrics for assessing the fit of the models to the data. We describe such a metric based on the fit of atomic models with independent test maps from single particle reconstructions not used in model refinement. The metric provides a means to determine the proper balance between the fit to the density and model energy and stereochemistry during refinement, and is likely to be useful in determining values of model building and refinement metaparameters quite generally.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pro.2267

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Overfitting of the model was monitored and controlled with a half-map approach: one half-map was used for density-guided refinement and the other for validation.

    “Model overfitting was monitored and contained using the half-map approach as previously described64,65, in which one-half map from RELION Refine3d was used for density-guided refinement, whereas the other half map was used for validation.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
DiMaio, F., Zhang, J., Chiu, W., & Baker, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Baylor College of Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Baker, David
Venue
Protein Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-05-25
Volume
22
Issue
6
Pages
865-868
ISSN
  • 0961-8368 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-896X
OpenAlex
W2131495934
Cited by
72
References
18
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2
FWCI
6.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Protein Science (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
NIH (P41GM103832, PN2EY016525, R01GM079429, and R01GM092802)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Structural Biology › Advanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Enzyme Structure and Function
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
Keywords
cryo-electron microscopy, model validation, single-particle reconstruction, model refinement, stereochemistry, model development, protein structure
MeSH terms
Models, Molecular, Chaperonins, Thermococcus, Archaeal Proteins, Cryoelectron Microscopy

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