Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 319

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Distance restraints from crosslinking mass spectrometry: Mining a molecular dynamics simulation database to evaluate lysine–lysine distances

Open access
Merkley, Eric D., Rysavy, Steven, Kahraman, Abdullah, Hafen, Ryan P., Daggett, Valerie, Adkins, Joshua N.·2014·Protein Science

Abstract

Integrative structural biology attempts to model the structures of protein complexes that are challenging or intractable by classical structural methods (due to size, dynamics, or heterogeneity) by combining computational structural modeling with data from experimental methods. One such experimental method is chemical crosslinking mass spectrometry (XL‐MS), in which protein complexes are crosslinked and characterized using liquid chromatography‐mass spectrometry to pinpoint specific amino acid residues in close structural proximity. The commonly used lysine‐reactive N‐hydroxysuccinimide ester reagents disuccinimidylsuberate (DSS) and bis(sulfosuccinimidyl)suberate (BS 3) have a linker arm that is 11.4 Å long when fully extended, allowing C α (alpha carbon of protein backbone) atoms of crosslinked lysine residues to be up to ∼24 Å apart. However, XL‐MS studies on proteins of known structure frequently report crosslinks that exceed this distance. Typically, a tolerance of ∼3 Å is added to the theoretical maximum to account for this observation, with limited justification for the chosen value. We used the Dynameomics database, a repository of high‐quality molecular dynamics simulations of 807 proteins representative of diverse protein folds, to investigate the relationship between lysine–lysine distances in experimental starting structures and in simulation ensembles. We conclude that for DSS/BS 3, a distance constraint of 26–30 Å between C α atoms is appropriate. This analysis provides a theoretical basis for the widespread practice of adding a tolerance to the crosslinker length when comparing XL‐MS results to structures or in modeling. We also discuss the comparison of XL‐MS results to MD simulations and known structures as a means to test and validate experimental XL‐MS methods.

Overview

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.2458

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 319

Metadata

Authors
Merkley, E. D., Rysavy, S., Kahraman, A., Hafen, R. P., Daggett, V., & Adkins, J. N.
Venue
Protein Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-04-03
Volume
23
Issue
6
Pages
747-759
ISSN
  • 0961-8368 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-896X
OpenAlex
W1921676712
Cited by
319
References
1
FWCI
7.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Distance restraints from crosslinking mass spectrometry: Mining a molecular dynamics simulation database to evaluate lysine–lysine distances. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/pro.2458
The paper
Merkley, E. D., Rysavy, S., Kahraman, A., Hafen, R. P., Daggett, V., & Adkins, J. N. (2014). Distance restraints from crosslinking mass spectrometry: Mining a molecular dynamics simulation database to evaluate lysine–lysine distances. Protein Science. https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.2458

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.