Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 400

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Measurement of atom resolvability in cryo-EM maps with Q-scores

Open access
Pintilie, Grigore, Zhang, Kaiming, Su, Zhaoming, Li, Shanshan, Schmid, Michael F., Chiu, Wah·2020·Nature Methods

Abstract

Cryogenic electron microscopy (cryo-EM) maps are now at the point where resolvability of individual atoms can be achieved. However, resolvability is not necessarily uniform throughout the map. We introduce a quantitative parameter to characterize the resolvability of individual atoms in cryo-EM maps, the map Q -score. Q -scores can be calculated for atoms in proteins, nucleic acids, water, ligands and other solvent atoms, using models fitted to or derived from cryo-EM maps. Q -scores can also be averaged to represent larger features such as entire residues and nucleotides. Averaged over entire models, Q -scores correlate very well with the estimated resolution of cryo-EM maps for both protein and RNA. Assuming the models they are calculated from are well fitted to the map, Q -scores can be used as a measure of resolvability in cryo-EM maps at various scales, from entire macromolecules down to individual atoms. Q -score analysis of multiple cryo-EM maps of the same proteins derived from different laboratories confirms the reproducibility of structural features from side chains down to water and ion atoms. Q -scores provide a quantitative metric for resolvability in cryo-EM maps, and can be used at the atom, residue or macromolecule scale.

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 · 10.1038/s41592-020-0731-1

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Pintilie, G., Zhang, K., Su, Z., Li, S., Schmid, M. F., & Chiu, W.
Venue
Nature Methods
Published
2020-02-10
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
328-334
ISSN
  • 1548-7091 (ISSN-L)
  • 1548-7105
OpenAlex
W3005016287
Cited by
400
References
3
FWCI
17.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

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.