pith. sign in

arxiv: 2507.08188 · v2 · submitted 2025-07-10 · 🧬 q-bio.BM

Unavailability of experimental 3D structural data on protein folding dynamics and necessity for a new generation of structure prediction methods in this context

Aydin Wells , Khalique Newaz , Jennifer Morones , Jianlin Cheng , Tijana Milenkovi\'c This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 05:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧬 q-bio.BM
keywords protein foldingfolding intermediates3D structure predictionco-translational foldingpost-translational foldingAlphaFold2protein misfolding
0
0 comments X

The pith

Only six studies supply 3D structures for protein folding intermediates, each covering a single protein.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper performs a literature search for 3D structural data on folding intermediates, which are the transient conformations a protein adopts while folding. It reports that just six studies exist, two on post-translational folding and four on co-translational folding, with each study limited to one protein and two to four intermediates. This scarcity restricts analysis of folding pathways and diseases linked to misfolding. The authors test whether native-structure predictors such as AlphaFold2 can handle non-native intermediates and find they cannot, while noting newer methods that embed biophysical folding rules appear more promising.

Core claim

A systematic literature search identifies only six studies that report 3D coordinates for folding intermediates, each focused on a single protein and yielding two to four such states. Established predictors of native structure, including AlphaFold2, perform poorly on these non-native conformations in co-translational and post-translational contexts, whereas recently introduced methods that incorporate intrinsic biophysical properties of the folding process show better accuracy.

What carries the argument

Literature review that compiles 3D structural data on folding intermediates and evaluates native-structure predictors against non-native states.

If this is right

  • Knowledge of how proteins reach their native folds remains incomplete without more intermediate structures.
  • Predictors trained only on native structures cannot reliably model folding pathways.
  • New methods must integrate biophysical folding characteristics to succeed on non-native states.
  • A centralized collection of intermediate structures would support further method development.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Improved experimental techniques for capturing short-lived intermediates could directly address the current data gap.
  • Better models of intermediates may help explain and treat protein-misfolding disorders.
  • Extending the new dynamics-aware predictors to larger protein sets would test their broader usefulness.

Load-bearing premise

The literature search has captured every experimental and computational study that supplies 3D coordinates for folding intermediates.

What would settle it

Publication of additional studies that report 3D coordinates for folding intermediates across multiple proteins would falsify the reported scarcity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.08188 by Aydin Wells, Jennifer Morones, Jianlin Cheng, Khalique Newaz, Tijana Milenkovi\'c.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Illustrations of (a) post-translational and (b) co-translational protein folding pathway intermediates. (a) A protein’s entire sequence (blue line) undergoes conformational changes. The resulting 3D structures from time 0 to time n are the n + 1 intermediates in the post-translational pathway. (b) A protein’s nascent sequence undergoes conformational changes as newly translated amino acids are added (as in… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Summary of this paper that is focused on availability and analysis of 3D structural data related to protein folding dynamics. energy) data for 31,580 (12,050 wild-type and 19,530 mutated) proteins [43]. For co-translational folding, we could not identify any organized database containing either kinetics or thermodynamics data. Instead, we could identify some isolated studies that provide data of these type… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Details of the four studies we have identified that report 3D structural data of co-translational intermediates. The protein from the first study listed has intermediates for two deposited sequence ranges (1: 1-27, 2: 1-70). For each of the two intermediates, three distinct conformations are provided (a, b, and c). Conformation 2c is the native structure of the protein (as denoted by an asterisk); see Supp… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Illustration of (a) a static protein structure network (PSN), (b) “proxy” co-translational intermediates, and (c) dynamic PSN, all for the same protein with PDB ID 1AOK. The static PSN captures the native structure of the protein. “Proxy” co-translational intermediates capture gradually increasing portion of the protein sequence and the corresponding portion of the native 3D structure, with the last “proxy… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Motivation: Protein folding is a dynamic process during which a protein's amino acid sequence undergoes a series of 3-dimensional (3D) conformational changes en route to reaching a native 3D structure; the resulting 3D structural conformations are called folding intermediates. While data on native 3D structures are abundant, data on 3D structures of non-native intermediates remain sparse, due to limitations of current technologies for experimental determination of 3D structures. Yet, analyzing folding intermediates is crucial for understanding folding dynamics and misfolding-related diseases. Hence, we search the literature for available (experimentally and computationally obtained) 3D structural data on folding intermediates, organizing the data in a centralized resource. Additionally, we assess whether existing methods, designed for predicting native structures, can also be utilized to predict structures of non-native intermediates. Results: Our literature search reveals six studies that provide 3D structural data on folding intermediates (two for post-translational and four for co-translational folding), each focused on a single protein, with 2-4 intermediates. Our assessment shows that an established method for predicting native structures, AlphaFold2, does not perform well for non-native intermediates in the context of co-translational folding; a recent study on post-translational folding concluded the same for even more existing methods. Yet, we identify in the literature recent pioneering methods designed explicitly to predict 3D structures of folding intermediates by incorporating intrinsic biophysical characteristics of folding dynamics, which show promise. This study assesses the current landscape and future directions of the field of 3D structural analysis of protein folding dynamics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper reports a literature search for 3D structural data (experimental or computational) on protein folding intermediates, identifying only six studies total—two on post-translational folding and four on co-translational folding—each limited to a single protein and 2–4 intermediates. It evaluates that native-structure predictors such as AlphaFold2 perform poorly on these non-native states (consistent with a cited post-translational study), while noting emerging methods that incorporate folding dynamics, and concludes that new structure-prediction approaches tailored to folding intermediates are needed.

Significance. If the search is shown to be comprehensive, the work usefully documents a data gap that limits mechanistic understanding of folding pathways and misfolding diseases, supplies an organized resource, and correctly identifies that current native-structure tools are insufficient while highlighting promising biophysical extensions.

major comments (1)
  1. [Results / Literature Search] Results section (and any Methods subsection describing the search): the headline claim that only six studies exist rests on an unreported search protocol. No Boolean queries, databases (PubMed, PDB, etc.), date range, or explicit inclusion criteria (e.g., whether MD snapshots, NMR ensembles, or only experimentally solved intermediates qualify) are provided. Alternative terminology such as “folding pathway,” “transient ensemble,” or “nascent-chain structure” could easily have missed papers, especially in computational venues. This directly undermines the central scarcity argument.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the sentence “a recent study on post-translational folding concluded the same for even more existing methods” should name the study and the methods evaluated for immediate clarity.
  2. [Results] The manuscript would benefit from a small table summarizing the six identified studies (protein, folding type, number of intermediates, data source, reference) to make the scarcity claim immediately verifiable.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback highlighting the need for transparency in our literature search. We address the major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the presentation of our findings.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results / Literature Search] Results section (and any Methods subsection describing the search): the headline claim that only six studies exist rests on an unreported search protocol. No Boolean queries, databases (PubMed, PDB, etc.), date range, or explicit inclusion criteria (e.g., whether MD snapshots, NMR ensembles, or only experimentally solved intermediates qualify) are provided. Alternative terminology such as “folding pathway,” “transient ensemble,” or “nascent-chain structure” could easily have missed papers, especially in computational venues. This directly undermines the central scarcity argument.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit description of the search protocol is necessary to support the central claim. In the revised manuscript we will insert a new Methods subsection that details the protocol: databases queried (PubMed, Google Scholar, arXiv, PDB, and bioRxiv), date range (1990–2024), and Boolean search strings combining terms such as (protein folding AND intermediate) AND (3D structure OR atomic model OR NMR OR cryo-EM OR molecular dynamics OR folding pathway OR transient ensemble OR nascent-chain structure OR co-translational folding). Inclusion criteria will be stated as: peer-reviewed or preprint studies that report 3D structural coordinates or ensembles for folding intermediates of a specific protein, encompassing both experimental methods and computational simulations validated against experimental observables. We will also document that searches were repeated with the alternative terminologies suggested by the referee. These additions will allow independent assessment of completeness and directly address the concern that relevant papers may have been missed. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; central claim is empirical count from external literature search

full rationale

The paper's headline result (only six studies providing 3D coordinates for folding intermediates) is the direct output of a literature search over external publications rather than any derivation, fit, or self-referential equation. No self-definitional steps, fitted-input predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the abstract or described content. The assessment of existing predictors (AlphaFold2 and others) is likewise referenced to external evaluations. The completeness of the search is an assumption that affects validity but does not create circularity by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is a literature-review paper. It contains no mathematical derivations, fitted parameters, or newly postulated physical entities. The central claims rest on the completeness of the literature search and the representativeness of the method assessments performed.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5850 in / 1014 out tokens · 30918 ms · 2026-05-19T05:11:17.465162+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Abramson, J

    J. Abramson, J. Adler, J. Dunger, R. Evans, T. Green, A. Pritzel, O. Ronneberger, L. Willmore, A. J. Ballard, J. Bambrick, et al. Accurate structure prediction of biomolecular interactions with AlphaFold 3. Nature, 630(8016):493–500, 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Agirrezabala, E

    X. Agirrezabala, E. Samatova, M. Macher, M. Liutkute, M. Maiti, D. Gil-Carton, J. Novacek, M. Valle, and M. V. Rodnina. A switch fromα-helical toβ-strand conformation during co-translational protein folding.The EMBO Journal, 41(4):e109175, 2022

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Alberts, A

    B. Alberts, A. Johnson, J. Lewis, M. Raff, K. Roberts, and P. Walter. The shape and structure of proteins. InMolecular Biology of the Cell, 4th edition. Garland Science, 2002

    work page 2002

  4. [4]

    R. L. Baldwin. On-pathway versus off-pathway folding intermediates.Folding and Design, 1(1):R1–R8, 1996

    work page 1996

  5. [5]

    Basharov

    M. Basharov. Protein Folding.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine, 7(3):223–237, 2003

    work page 2003

  6. [6]

    L. D. Cabrita, A. M. Cassaignau, H. M. Launay, C. A. Waudby, T. Wlodarski, C. Camilloni, M.-E. Karyadi, A. L. Robertson, X. Wang, A. S. Wentink, et al. A structural ensemble of a ribosome– nascent chain complex during cotranslational protein folding.Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, 23(4):278–285, 2016

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    P. L. Clark. Protein folding in the cell: reshaping the folding funnel.Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 29(10):527–534, 2004

    work page 2004

  8. [8]

    Duran-Romaña, B

    R. Duran-Romaña, B. Houben, P. F. Migens, Y. Zhang, F. Rousseau, and J. Schymkowitz. Native fold delay and its implications for co-translational chaperone binding and protein aggregation.Nature Communications, 16(1):1673, 2025

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    Elofsson

    A. Elofsson. AlphaFold3 at CASP16.bioRxiv, pages 2025–04, 2025

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    S. W. Englander and L. Mayne. The nature of protein folding pathways.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(45):15873–15880, 2014

    work page 2014

  11. [11]

    F. E. Faisal, K. Newaz, J. L. Chaney, J. Li, S. J. Emrich, P. L. Clark, and T. Milenković. GRAFENE: Graphlet-based alignment-free network approach integrates 3D structural and sequence (residue order) data to improve protein structural comparison.Scientific Reports, 7(1):14890, 2017. 13

    work page 2017

  12. [12]

    J. A. Farías-Rico, F. Ruud Selin, I. Myronidi, M. Frühauf, and G. Von Heijne. Effects of protein size, thermodynamic stability, and net charge on cotranslational folding on the ribosome.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(40):E9280–E9287, 2018

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    N. K. Fox, S. E. Brenner, and J.-M. Chandonia. SCOPe: Structural Classification of Proteins—extended, integrating SCOP and ASTRAL data and classification of new structures.Nucleic Acids Research, 42(D1):D304–D309, 2014

    work page 2014

  14. [14]

    P. L. Freddolino, C. B. Harrison, Y. Liu, and K. Schulten. Challenges in protein-folding simulations. Nature Physics, 6(10):751–758, 2010

    work page 2010

  15. [15]

    Gelman and M

    H. Gelman and M. Gruebele. Fast protein folding kinetics.Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics, 47(2):95–142, 2014

    work page 2014

  16. [16]

    Gershenson, S

    A. Gershenson, S. Gosavi, P. Faccioli, and P. L. Wintrode. Successes and challenges in simulating the folding of large proteins.Journal of Biological Chemistry, 295(1):15–33, 2020

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

    Gething and J

    M.-J. Gething and J. Sambrook. Protein folding in the cell.Nature, 355(6355):33–45, 1992

    work page 1992

  18. [18]

    Gligorijević, P

    V. Gligorijević, P. D. Renfrew, T. Kosciolek, J. K. Leman, D. Berenberg, T. Vatanen, C. Chandler, B. C. Taylor, I. M. Fisk, H. Vlamakis, et al. Structure-based protein function prediction using graph convolutional networks.Nature Communications, 12(1):3168, 2021

    work page 2021

  19. [19]

    L. H. Greene, T. E. Lewis, S. Addou, A. Cuff, T. Dallman, M. Dibley, O. Redfern, F. Pearl, R. Nambudiry, A. Reid, et al. The CATH domain structure database: new protocols and classification levels give a more comprehensive resource for exploring evolution.Nucleic Acids Research, 35(suppl_1):D291–D297, 2007

    work page 2007

  20. [20]

    Hanazono, K

    Y. Hanazono, K. Takeda, and K. Miki. Structural studies of the n-terminal fragments of the WW domain: Insights into co-translational folding of a beta-sheet protein.Scientific Reports, 6(1):34654, 2016

    work page 2016

  21. [21]

    Hanazono, K

    Y. Hanazono, K. Takeda, and K. Miki. Co-translational folding ofα-helical proteins: structural studies of intermediate-length variants of theλrepressor.FEBS Open Bio, 8(8):1312–1321, 2018

    work page 2018

  22. [22]

    F. U. Hartl. Protein misfolding diseases.Annual Review of Biochemistry, 86(1):21–26, 2017

    work page 2017

  23. [23]

    J. Hu, T. Chen, M. Wang, H. S. Chan, and Z. Zhang. A critical comparison of coarse-grained structure-based approaches and atomic models of protein folding.Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics, 19(21):13629–13639, 2017

    work page 2017

  24. [24]

    Huang, X

    Z. Huang, X. Cui, Y. Xia, K. Zhao, and G. jun Zhang. Pathfinder: Protein folding pathway prediction based on conformational sampling.PLOS Computational Biology, 19, 2023

    work page 2023

  25. [25]

    W. M. Jacobs and E. I. Shakhnovich. Evidence of evolutionary selection for cotranslational folding. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(43):11434–11439, 2017

    work page 2017

  26. [26]

    D. A. Kelkar, A. Khushoo, Z. Yang, and W. R. Skach. Kinetic analysis of ribosome-bound fluorescent proteins reveals an early, stable, cotranslational folding intermediate.Journal of Biological Chemistry, 287(4):2568–2578, 2012

    work page 2012

  27. [27]

    G. Klebe. Experimental methods of structure determination. InDrug Design: From Structure and Mode-of-Action to Rational Design Concepts, pages 193–214. Springer, 2025

    work page 2025

  28. [28]

    Kmiecik, D

    S. Kmiecik, D. Gront, M. Kolinski, L. Wieteska, A. E. Dawid, and A. Kolinski. Coarse-grained protein models and their applications.Chemical Reviews, 116(14):7898–7936, 2016

    work page 2016

  29. [29]

    P. Koehl. Protein structure classification.Reviews in Computational Chemistry, 22:1–55, 2006

    work page 2006

  30. [30]

    Lindorff-Larsen, S

    K. Lindorff-Larsen, S. Piana, R. O. Dror, and D. E. Shaw. How fast-folding proteins fold.Science, 334(6055):517–520, 2011

    work page 2011

  31. [31]

    Manavalan, K

    B. Manavalan, K. Kuwajima, and J. Lee. PFDB: A standardized protein folding database with temperature correction.Scientific Reports, 9(1):1588, 2019

    work page 2019

  32. [32]

    Mariani, M

    V. Mariani, M. Biasini, A. Barbato, and T. Schwede. lDDT: a local superposition-free score for comparing protein structures and models using distance difference tests.Bioinformatics, 29(21):2722–2728, 2013

    work page 2013

  33. [33]

    Mayor, C

    U. Mayor, C. M. Johnson, V. Daggett, and A. R. Fersht. Protein folding and unfolding in microseconds to nanoseconds by experiment and simulation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97(25):13518–13522, 2000

    work page 2000

  34. [34]

    Mirdita, K

    M. Mirdita, K. Schütze, Y. Moriwaki, L. Heo, S. Ovchinnikov, and M. Steinegger. ColabFold: making protein folding accessible to all.Nature Methods, 19(6):679–682, 2022. 14

    work page 2022

  35. [35]

    Morehead and J

    A. Morehead and J. Cheng. Geometry-complete diffusion for 3D molecule generation and optimization. Communications Chemistry, 7(1):150, 2024

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    Morehead and J

    A. Morehead and J. Cheng. Geometry-complete perceptron networks for 3D molecular graphs.Bioinfor- matics, 40(2):btae087, 2024

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    M. J. Moss, L. M. Chamness, and P. L. Clark. The effects of codon usage on protein structure and folding.Annual Review of Biophysics, 53, 2024

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    Neudecker, P

    P. Neudecker, P. Robustelli, A. Cavalli, P. Walsh, P. Lundström, A. Zarrine-Afsar, S. Sharpe, M. Vendr- uscolo, and L. E. Kay. Structure of an intermediate state in protein folding and aggregation.Science, 336(6079):362–366, 2012

    work page 2012

  39. [39]

    Newaz, M

    K. Newaz, M. Ghalehnovi, A. Rahnama, P. J. Antsaklis, and T. Milenković. Network-based protein structural classification.Royal Society open science, 7(6):191461, 2020

    work page 2020

  40. [40]

    Newaz and T

    K. Newaz and T. Milenković. Graphlets in network science and computational biology.Analyzing network data in biology and medicine: an interdisciplinary textbook for biological, medical and computational scientists, 193, 2019

    work page 2019

  41. [41]

    Newaz, J

    K. Newaz, J. Piland, P. L. Clark, S. J. Emrich, J. Li, and T. Milenković. Multi-layer sequential network analysis improves protein 3D structural classification.Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 90(9):1721–1731, 2022

    work page 2022

  42. [42]

    Newaz, G

    K. Newaz, G. Wright, J. Piland, J. Li, P. L. Clark, S. J. Emrich, and T. Milenković. Network analysis of synonymous codon usage.Bioinformatics, 36(19):4876–4884, 2020

    work page 2020

  43. [43]

    Nikam, A

    R. Nikam, A. Kulandaisamy, K. Harini, D. Sharma, and M. M. Gromiha. ProThermDB: thermodynamic database for proteins and mutants revisited after 15 years.Nucleic Acids Research, 49(D1):D420–D424, 2021

    work page 2021

  44. [44]

    O. B. Nilsson, R. Hedman, J. Marino, S. Wickles, L. Bischoff, M. Johansson, A. Müller-Lucks, F. Trovato, J. D. Puglisi, E. P. O’Brien, et al. Cotranslational protein folding inside the ribosome exit tunnel.Cell Reports, 12(10):1533–1540, 2015

    work page 2015

  45. [45]

    Olechnovič, B

    K. Olechnovič, B. Monastyrskyy, A. Kryshtafovych, and Č. Venclovas. Comparative analysis of methods for evaluation of protein models against native structures.Bioinformatics, 35(6):937–944, 2019

    work page 2019

  46. [46]

    Outeiral, D

    C. Outeiral, D. A. Nissley, and C. M. Deane. Current structure predictors are not learning the physics of protein folding.Bioinformatics, 38:1881–1887, 2022

    work page 2022

  47. [47]

    E. P. O’Brien, P. Ciryam, M. Vendruscolo, and C. M. Dobson. Understanding the influence of codon translation rates on cotranslational protein folding.Accounts of chemical research, 47(5):1536–1544, 2014

    work page 2014

  48. [48]

    Pancsa, M

    R. Pancsa, M. Varadi, P. Tompa, and W. F. Vranken. Start2Fold: a database of hydrogen/deuterium exchange data on protein folding and stability.Nucleic Acids Research, 44(D1):D429–D434, 2016

    work page 2016

  49. [49]

    Plessa, L

    E. Plessa, L. P. Chu, S. H. Chan, O. L. Thomas, A. M. Cassaignau, C. A. Waudby, J. Christodoulou, and L. D. Cabrita. Nascent chains can form co-translational folding intermediates that promote post-translational folding outcomes in a disease-causing protein.Nature Communications, 12(1):6447, 2021

    work page 2021

  50. [50]

    P. L. Privalov. Intermediate states in protein folding.Journal of Molecular Biology, 258(5):707–725, 1996

    work page 1996

  51. [51]

    A. J. Samelson, E. Bolin, S. M. Costello, A. K. Sharma, E. P. O’Brien, and S. Marqusee. Kinetic and structural comparison of a protein’s cotranslational folding and refolding pathways.Science Advances, 4(5):eaas9098, 2018

    work page 2018

  52. [52]

    Siller, D

    E. Siller, D. C. DeZwaan, J. F. Anderson, B. C. Freeman, and J. M. Barral. Slowing bacterial translation speed enhances eukaryotic protein folding efficiency.Journal of Molecular Biology, 396(5):1310–1318, 2010

    work page 2010

  53. [53]

    C. Soto. Unfolding the role of protein misfolding in neurodegenerative diseases.Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4(1):49–60, 2003

    work page 2003

  54. [54]

    Tsytlonok and L

    M. Tsytlonok and L. S. Itzhaki. The how’s and why’s of protein folding intermediates.Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, 531(1-2):14–23, 2013

    work page 2013

  55. [55]

    Varadi, D

    M. Varadi, D. Bertoni, P. Magana, U. Paramval, I. Pidruchna, M. Radhakrishnan, M. Tsenkov, S. Nair, M. Mirdita, J. Yeo, et al. AlphaFold Protein Structure Database in 2024: providing structure coverage for over 214 million protein sequences.Nucleic Acids Research, 52(D1):D368–D375, 2024. 15

    work page 2024

  56. [56]

    Alignmentofdynamicnetworks.Bioinformatics, 33(14):i180– i189, 2017

    V.Vijayan, D.Critchlow, andT.Milenković. Alignmentofdynamicnetworks.Bioinformatics, 33(14):i180– i189, 2017

    work page 2017

  57. [57]

    Wagner and T

    C. Wagner and T. Kiefhaber. Intermediates can accelerate protein folding.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 96(12):6716–6721, 1999

    work page 1999

  58. [58]

    S. Wang, A. Bitran, E. Samatova, E. Shakhnovich, and M. Rodnina. Cotranslational protein folding through non-native structural intermediates.bioRxiv, pages 2025–04, 2025

    work page 2025

  59. [59]

    Protein Data Bank: the single global archive for 3D macromolecular structure data

    wwPDBconsortium. Protein Data Bank: the single global archive for 3D macromolecular structure data. Nucleic Acids Research, 47(D1):D520–D528, 2019

    work page 2019

  60. [60]

    Xu and Y

    J. Xu and Y. Zhang. How significant is a protein structure similarity with TM-score= 0.5?Bioinformatics, 26(7):889–895, 2010

    work page 2010

  61. [61]

    R. Yuan, J. Zhang, A. Kryshtafovych, R. D. Schaeffer, J. Zhou, Q. Cong, and N. V. Grishin. Casp16 protein monomer structure prediction assessment.bioRxiv, pages 2025–05, 2025

    work page 2025

  62. [62]

    Zhang and J

    Y. Zhang and J. Skolnick. Scoring function for automated assessment of protein structure template quality.Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 57(4):702–710, 2004

    work page 2004

  63. [63]

    K.-L. Zhao, J. Liu, X.-G. Zhou, J.-Z. Su, Y. Zhang, and G.-J. Zhang. MMpred: a distance-assisted multimodal conformation sampling for de novo protein structure prediction.Bioinformatics, 37(23):4350– 4356, 2021

    work page 2021

  64. [64]

    Q. Zhao. Nature of protein dynamics and thermodynamics.Reviews in Theoretical Science, 1(1):83–101, 2013

    work page 2013

  65. [65]

    Zheng, K

    H. Zheng, K. B. Handing, M. D. Zimmerman, I. G. Shabalin, S. C. Almo, and W. Minor. X-ray crystallography over the past decade for novel drug discovery–where are we heading next?Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery, 10(9):975–989, 2015

    work page 2015

  66. [66]

    Z. Zhou, H. Feng, R. Ghirlando, and Y. Bai. The high-resolution NMR structure of the early folding intermediate of the Thermus thermophilus ribonuclease H.Journal of Molecular Biology, 384(2):531–539, 2008

    work page 2008

  67. [67]

    Zitnik, M

    M. Zitnik, M. M. Li, A. Wells, K. Glass, D. Morselli Gysi, A. Krishnan, P. Radivojac, S. Roy, A. Baudot, et al. Current and future directions in network biology.Bioinformatics Advances, 4(1):vbae099, 2024. 16 Supplementary Information Section S1 Supporting text for the main paper Section S1.1 Additional details on kinetics and thermodynamics data related ...

    work page 2024

  68. [68]

    early-stage

    captured kinetics data for intermediates of the protein mCherry at specific time points. Section S1.2 Additional information about the studies on experimentally determined 3D structures of post-translational intermediates Here we complement Section 2.1 in the main paper by providing more details about the two studies on post-translational intermediates: N...

    work page 2012