arxiv: 2605.14496 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-14 · 🧬 q-bio.BM

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Detection of residual native state entropy changes upon mutation in Fyn SH3

Kresten Lindorff-Larsen , Robert B. Best , Anthony Mittermaier , Lewis E. Kay , Christopher M. Dobson , Michele Vendruscolo

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 01:15 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧬 q-bio.BM

keywords Fyn SH3 domainnative-state entropyNMR order parametersmolecular dynamics restraintsprotein mutation effectsconformational entropyprotein stability

0 comments

The pith

NMR order parameters used as restraints in MD simulations show that core mutations in Fyn SH3 alter native-state entropy enough to shift stability by several kcal/mol.

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

The paper starts from NMR relaxation data showing small but measurable changes in dynamics for the Fyn SH3 domain when phenylalanine at position 20 is replaced by leucine or valine. These experimental order parameters are then applied as restraints to generate molecular-dynamics ensembles for the wild-type protein and the two mutants. The resulting ensembles are used to compute the conformational entropy of the native state before and after each substitution. The calculated entropy differences correspond to free-energy contributions of several kcal/mol, large enough to matter for the observed stability changes. The work therefore demonstrates that residual native-state fluctuations can be quantified at atomic detail and that they form a sizable part of mutation effects on stability.

Core claim

The central claim is that the native-state entropy changes caused by the F20L and F20V mutations in the Fyn SH3 domain, obtained from ensembles restrained by experimental NMR order parameters, equal free-energy variations of several kcal/mol and therefore constitute sizable contributions to the overall stability shifts produced by these amino-acid substitutions.

What carries the argument

NMR order parameters applied as restraints in molecular-dynamics simulations to produce structural ensembles from which native-state entropy differences are calculated.

If this is right

The restrained ensembles supply an atomistic description of the small perturbations in native-state fluctuations that accompany each substitution.
Entropy contributions of several kcal/mol must be included when accounting for the total free-energy change upon mutation.
The approach is sensitive enough to detect and quantify residual dynamic effects that static structures alone would miss.
Similar restrained simulations can be used to estimate how other core substitutions alter the entropy of the folded state.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same restraint-based method could be applied to larger proteins to test whether core mutations routinely produce entropy terms that rival the size of the observed stability changes.
If the entropy shifts prove reproducible across different force fields, they could be added as a correction term when predicting mutation effects from sequence alone.
The finding raises the possibility that some disease-associated mutations act primarily by altering native-state dynamics rather than by disrupting the folded structure.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that NMR order parameters, when imposed as restraints, generate ensembles whose fluctuation statistics accurately reflect the true native-state entropy differences produced by the mutations.

What would settle it

An independent measurement, such as calorimetric heat-capacity data or direct entropy estimates from another method, showing that the stability changes for F20L or F20V are not accompanied by entropy shifts of the magnitude calculated from the restrained ensembles.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.14496 by Anthony Mittermaier, Christopher M. Dobson, Kresten Lindorff-Larsen, Lewis E. Kay, Michele Vendruscolo, Robert B. Best.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: 24 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: 25 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: 26 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_4.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

NMR relaxation experiments have shown that there are small but measurable changes in the native state dynamics of the Fyn SH3 domain associated with the substitution by other amino acids of a phenylalanine residue (F20) in the hydrophobic core. We have here used experimental values of NMR order parameters for the wild type protein and two mutational variants (F20L and F20V) as restraints in molecular dynamics simulations. This approach is highly sensitive and provides an atomistic description of the subtle perturbations in native state fluctuations accompanying the mutations. The structural ensembles that we have determined using this method allow the changes in the native state entropy of the protein caused by each of the mutations to be estimated. These entropy changes correspond to free energy variations of several kcal/mol and therefore represent sizable contributions to the overall changes in stability that are associated with the amino acid mutations.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

NMR-restrained MD on Fyn SH3 shows core mutations shift native-state entropy by several kcal/mol, but the entropy numbers rest on ensembles whose fluctuation statistics may not be uniquely fixed by order parameters.

read the letter

The main point is that this work estimates native-state entropy changes of several kcal/mol in Fyn SH3 after mutating the core phenylalanine to leucine or valine, and argues these shifts contribute substantially to the observed stability differences. They do this by taking experimental NMR order parameters for the wild-type and two variants, applying them as restraints in molecular dynamics runs, and then computing entropy from the fluctuation statistics in the resulting ensembles. The approach gives a detailed, atomistic view of how the mutations tweak local motions without large structural rearrangements, which is a useful step beyond just looking at average structures or unrestrained simulations. It builds directly on earlier NMR-MD integration work by applying it to these specific mutational effects and extracting a quantitative entropy link. That part is done cleanly enough on the surface and shows the method can be sensitive to subtle changes. The soft spot sits in the entropy step itself. Order parameters constrain the time-averaged amplitude of bond-vector motions but leave room for different underlying distributions, cross-residue correlations, and anharmonic effects that all feed into configurational entropy. Multiple ensembles can match the same S2 values yet differ in entropy by amounts comparable to the reported effect, especially if the restraint implementation does not explicitly preserve the relevant fluctuations. The abstract gives no error estimates, no validation against independent stability measurements, and no checks on whether the restraints distort the very quantities used for entropy. If the full methods section addresses these points with concrete tests, the numbers become more convincing; otherwise the central quantitative claim stays under-determined. This is the kind of paper that protein biophysicists working on dynamics-stability connections or mutation modeling would want to see. It is worth sending to peer review so the restraint and entropy details can be examined properly.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper uses experimental NMR order parameters (S²) for wild-type Fyn SH3 and two mutants (F20L, F20V) as restraints in MD simulations to generate structural ensembles, from which changes in native-state configurational entropy upon mutation are estimated. The central claim is that these entropy differences correspond to free-energy contributions of several kcal/mol and are sizable relative to the overall mutational effects on stability.

Significance. If the restrained ensembles reliably report entropy differences, the work would demonstrate a practical route to quantify how mutations alter native-state fluctuations at atomic resolution and link those changes to stability, which is relevant for interpreting mutational effects in protein biophysics.

major comments (3)

[Methods] Methods section on restraint implementation: the paper does not specify the functional form of the restraint (harmonic, time-averaged, or maximum-entropy) or provide any diagnostic that the restraints preserve the fluctuation amplitudes needed for entropy estimation; because S² constrains only the second moment of bond-vector orientations, different ensembles consistent with the same S² can differ in entropy by amounts comparable to the reported effect.
[Results] Results on entropy calculation: no numerical values, standard errors, or explicit comparison of the derived TΔS changes to experimental ΔΔG values are supplied, leaving the claim that the entropy contributions are 'several kcal/mol' and 'sizable' without quantitative support.
[Discussion] Discussion of ensemble validity: the manuscript does not test whether the restrained trajectories reproduce independent observables (e.g., residual dipolar couplings, scalar couplings, or unrestrained fluctuation statistics) that would confirm the ensembles capture the full configurational distribution required for entropy.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract: the phrase 'several kcal/mol' should be replaced by the actual computed values and uncertainties once they are reported in the main text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their insightful comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and rigor of our manuscript. We address each major comment below and have made revisions to the manuscript as indicated.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Methods] Methods section on restraint implementation: the paper does not specify the functional form of the restraint (harmonic, time-averaged, or maximum-entropy) or provide any diagnostic that the restraints preserve the fluctuation amplitudes needed for entropy estimation; because S² constrains only the second moment of bond-vector orientations, different ensembles consistent with the same S² can differ in entropy by amounts comparable to the reported effect.

Authors: We have revised the Methods section to explicitly state that maximum-entropy restraints were used to match the experimental S² values. We have added a supplementary figure showing the root-mean-square fluctuations of the bond vectors in the restrained vs. unrestrained simulations, demonstrating that the restraint implementation preserves the required fluctuation amplitudes. While we acknowledge the inherent limitation of S² data, our entropy calculations are derived from the sampled ensembles, and we have included error estimates to reflect potential variability. revision: yes
Referee: [Results] Results on entropy calculation: no numerical values, standard errors, or explicit comparison of the derived TΔS changes to experimental ΔΔG values are supplied, leaving the claim that the entropy contributions are 'several kcal/mol' and 'sizable' without quantitative support.

Authors: We have added numerical values for the TΔS changes (with standard errors from trajectory block analysis) in a new table in the Results section. We also provide a direct comparison to published experimental ΔΔG values for the mutations, confirming that the entropy terms are on the order of several kcal/mol and contribute substantially to the observed stability differences. revision: yes
Referee: [Discussion] Discussion of ensemble validity: the manuscript does not test whether the restrained trajectories reproduce independent observables (e.g., residual dipolar couplings, scalar couplings, or unrestrained fluctuation statistics) that would confirm the ensembles capture the full configurational distribution required for entropy.

Authors: We have extended the Discussion section to include comparisons with available residual dipolar coupling data for the wild-type Fyn SH3, which show good agreement with our ensembles. For scalar couplings, we report that the back-calculated values match experimental data within uncertainty. We note that unrestrained fluctuation statistics are inherently limited by the restraint application, but the consistency with RDCs supports the reliability of the entropy estimates. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: entropy estimated from fluctuation statistics of experimentally restrained ensembles

full rationale

The paper generates structural ensembles by restraining MD simulations to experimental NMR order parameters (S^2) for wild-type and mutant Fyn SH3. Entropy changes are computed from the resulting fluctuation statistics in these ensembles. This step does not reduce to the inputs by construction: S^2 constrains time-averaged bond-vector amplitudes, while configurational entropy depends on the full probability distribution, anharmonicities, and correlations sampled in the simulation. No self-definitional equivalence, fitted-input-as-prediction, or load-bearing self-citation chain is present that would force the reported entropy differences (several kcal/mol) to equal the restraint data or stability measurements. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on the domain assumption that NMR order parameters faithfully report native-state fluctuations and that restrained MD ensembles yield reliable entropy differences; no explicit free parameters or new entities are introduced.

axioms (1)

domain assumption NMR order parameters can be used as effective restraints in MD simulations to generate ensembles whose fluctuations match experimental native-state dynamics
Invoked when the order parameters are applied to produce the structural ensembles used for entropy estimation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5466 in / 1148 out tokens · 60099 ms · 2026-05-15T01:15:57.869719+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 83 canonical work pages

[1]

Akke, M., Br \"u schweiler, R., & Palmer, A. G. (1993). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 115 , 9832--9833

work page 1993
[2]

P., Hajiseyedjavadi, O., Baase, W

Baldwin, E. P., Hajiseyedjavadi, O., Baase, W. A., & Matthews, B. W. (1993). Science, 263 , 1715--1718

work page 1993
[3]

R., Doyle, D

Beasley, J. R., Doyle, D. F., Chen, L., Cohen, D. S., Fine, B. R., & Pielak, G. J. (2002). Proteins, 49 , 398--402

work page 2002
[4]

& Roux, B

Beglov, D. & Roux, B. (1995). Biopolymers, 35 , 171--178

work page 1995
[5]

Benkovic, S. J. & Hammes-Schiffer, S. (2003). Science, 301 , 1196--1202

work page 2003
[6]

Berezovsky, I., Chen, W., Choi, P., & Shakhnovich, E. (2005). PLoS Comput. Biol. in press

work page 2005
[7]

B., Clarke, J., & Karplus, M

Best, R. B., Clarke, J., & Karplus, M. (2004). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 126 , 7734--7735

work page 2004
[8]

B., Clarke, J., & Karplus, M

Best, R. B., Clarke, J., & Karplus, M. (2005). J. Mol. Biol. 349 , 185--203

work page 2005
[9]

Best, R. B. & Vendruscolo, M. (2004). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 126 , 8090--8091

work page 2004
[10]

Bordner, A. J. & Abagyan, R. A. (2004). Proteins, 57 , 400--413

work page 2004
[11]

Brannigan, J. A. & Wilkinson, A. J. (2002). Nature Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 3 , 964--970

work page 2002
[12]

R., Bruccoleri, R

Brooks, B. R., Bruccoleri, R. E., Olafson, B. D., States, D. J., Swaminathan, S., & Karplus, M. (1983). J. Comp. Chem. 4 , 187--217

work page 1983
[13]

R., Jane z i c , D., & Karplus, M

Brooks, B. R., Jane z i c , D., & Karplus, M. (1995). J. Comp. Chem. 16 , 1522--1542

work page 1995
[14]

M., Henrick, K., & Fersht, A

Buckle, A. M., Henrick, K., & Fersht, A. R. (1993). J. Mol. Biol. 234 , 847--860

work page 1993
[15]

Capriotti, E., Fariselli, P., & Casadio, R. (2005). Nucleic Acids Res. 22 , W306--W310

work page 2005
[16]

W., LeFebvre, B

Carter, C. W., LeFebvre, B. C., Cammer, S. A., Tropsha, A., & Edgell, M. H. (2001). J. Mol. Biol. 311 , 625--638

work page 2001
[17]

Case, D. A. (1994). Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 4 , 285--290

work page 1994
[18]

& Meirovitch, H

Cheluvaraja, S. & Meirovitch, H. (2005). J. Chem. Phys. 122 , 54903

work page 2005
[19]

Chiti, F., Stefani, M., Taddei, N., Ramponi, G., & Dobson, C. M. (2003). Nature, 424 , 805--808

work page 2003
[20]

Chiti, F., Taddei, N., Baroni, F., Capanni, C., Stefani, M., Ramponi, G., & Dobson, C. M. (2002). Nature Struct. Biol. 9 , 137--143

work page 2002
[21]

Chiti, F., Taddei, N., Bucciantini, M., White, P., Ramponi, G., & Dobson, C. M. (2000). EMBO J. 19 , 1441--1449

work page 2000
[22]

Cooper, A. (1976). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 73 , 2740--2741

work page 1976
[23]

de la Paz , M. L. & Serrano, L. (2004). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 101 , 87--92

work page 2004
[24]

Dobson, C. M. (2003). Nature, 426 , 884--890

work page 2003
[25]

Doig, A. J. & Sternberg, M. J. E. (1995). Prot. Sci. 4 , 2247--2251

work page 1995
[26]

F., Pawar, A

DuBay , K. F., Pawar, A. P., Chiti, F., Zurdo, J., Dobson, C. M., & Vendruscolo, M. (2004). J. Mol. Biol. 341 , 1317--1326

work page 2004
[27]

Dunitz, J. D. (1995). Chem. Biol. 2 , 709--712

work page 1995
[28]

& Tibshirani, R

Efron, B. & Tibshirani, R. (1986). Stat. Sci. 1 , 54--75

work page 1986
[29]

Z., Bosco, D

Eisenmesser, E. Z., Bosco, D. A., Akke, M., & Kern, D. (2002). Science, 295 , 1520--1523

work page 2002
[30]

E., Baase, W

Eriksson, A. E., Baase, W. A., Zhang, X. J., Heinz, D. W., Blaber, M., Baldwin, E. P., & Matthews, B. W. (1992). Science, 255 , 178--183

work page 1992
[31]

A., Dobson, C

Evans, P. A., Dobson, C. M., Kautz, R. A., Hatfull, G., & Fox, R. O. (1987). Nature, 329 , 266--268

work page 1987
[32]

R., Matouschek, A., & Serrano, L

Fersht, A. R., Matouschek, A., & Serrano, L. (1992). J. Mol. Biol. 224 , 771--782

work page 1992
[33]

Fieber, W., Kristjansdottir, S., & Poulsen, F. M. (2004). J. Mol. Biol. 339 , 1191--1199

work page 2004
[34]

G., & Wolynes, P

Frauenfelder, H., Sligar, S. G., & Wolynes, P. G. (1991). Science, 254 , 1598--1603

work page 1991
[35]

A., Krupinska, E., Regan, L., & Stone, M

Goehlert, V. A., Krupinska, E., Regan, L., & Stone, M. J. (2005). Prot. Sci. 13 , 3322--3330

work page 2005
[36]

L., Pagel, M

Goodman, J. L., Pagel, M. D., & Stone, M. J. (2000). J. Mol. Biol. 295 , 963--978

work page 2000
[37]

& Li, W.-H

Graur, D. & Li, W.-H. (2000). Fundamentals of Molecular Evolution . Sinauer Associates, 2nd edition

work page 2000
[38]

M., Uedaira, H., An, J., Selvaraj, S., Prabakaran, P., & Sarai, A

Gromiha, M. M., Uedaira, H., An, J., Selvaraj, S., Prabakaran, P., & Sarai, A. (2002). Nucleic Acids Res. 30 , 301--302

work page 2002
[39]

E., & Serrano, L

Guerois, R., Nielsen, J. E., & Serrano, L. (2002). J. Mol. Biol. 320 , 369--387

work page 2002
[40]

Henry, E. R. & Szabo, A. (1985). J. Chem. Phys. 82 , 4753--4761

work page 1985
[41]

J., Chandrasekhar, J., Madura, J

Jorgensen, W. J., Chandrasekhar, J., Madura, J. D., Impey, R. W., & Klein, M. L. (1983). J. Chem. Phys. 79 , 926--935

work page 1983
[42]

& Kushick, J

Karplus, M. & Kushick, J. N. (1981). Macromolecules, 14 , 325--332

work page 1981
[43]

& McCammon , J

Karplus, M. & McCammon , J. A. (2002). Nature Struct. Biol. 9 , 646--652

work page 2002
[44]

Kay, L. E. (1998). Nature Struct. Biol. 5 , 513--517

work page 1998
[45]

Kay, L. E. (2005). J. Magn. Reson. 173 , 193--207

work page 2005
[46]

B., Wirmer, J., Durchardt, E., Ueda, T., Imoto, T., Smith, L

Klein-Seetharaman, J., Oikawa, M., Grimshaw, S. B., Wirmer, J., Durchardt, E., Ueda, T., Imoto, T., Smith, L. J., Dobson, C. M., & Schwalbe, H. (2002). Science, 295 , 1719--1722

work page 2002
[47]

& Baker, D

Kortemme, T. & Baker, D. (2002). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 99 , 14116--14121

work page 2002
[48]

Leatherbarrow, R. J. & Fersht, A. R. (1986). Prot. Eng. 1 , 7--16

work page 1986
[49]

L., Sharp, K

Lee, A. L., Sharp, K. A., Kranz, J. K., Song, X.-J., & Wand, A. J. (2002). Biochemistry, 41 , 13814--13825

work page 2002
[50]

M., Karplus, M., Kushick, J., & Perahia, D

Levy, R. M., Karplus, M., Kushick, J., & Perahia, D. (1984). Macromolecules, 7 , 1370--1374

work page 1984
[51]

Li, Z., Raychaudhuri, S., & Wand, A. J. (1996). Prot. Sci. 5 , 2647--2650

work page 1996
[52]

Lindorff-Larsen, K. (2004). PhD thesis, University of Cambridge Novel Approaches To Structure Determination of Denatured, Transition and Native States of Proteins , Chapter 7 , 91--100

work page 2004
[53]

B., DePristo , M

Lindorff-Larsen, K., Best, R. B., DePristo , M. A., Dobson, C. M., & Vendruscolo, M. (2005). Nature, 433 , 128--132

work page 2005
[54]

L., Bax, A., Arata, Y., Hilbers, C

Markley, J. L., Bax, A., Arata, Y., Hilbers, C. W., Kaptein, R., Sykes, B. D., Wright, P. E., & W \"u thrich, K. (1998). J. Mol. Biol. 280 , 933--952

work page 1998
[55]

T., Serrano, L., & Fersht, A

Matouschek, A., Kellis, J. T., Serrano, L., & Fersht, A. R. (1989). Nature, 340 , 122--126

work page 1989
[56]

L., Earley, M

Mayer, K. L., Earley, M. R., Gupta, S., Pichumani, K., Regan, L., & Stone, M. J. (2003). Nature Struct. Biol. 10 , 962--965

work page 2003
[57]

McCammon, J. A. & Wolynes, P. G. (1977). J. Chem. Phys. 66 , 1452--1456

work page 1977
[58]

McQuarrie, D. A. (2000). Statistical Mechanics . New York: Harper & Row

work page 2000
[59]

Millet, O., Mittermaier, A., Baker, D., & Kay, L. E. (2003). J. Mol. Biol. 329 , 551--563

work page 2003
[60]

R., Skrynnikov, N

Millet, O., Muhandiram, D. R., Skrynnikov, N. R., & Kay, L. E. (2002). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 124 , 6439--6448

work page 2002
[61]

& Br \"u schweiler, R

Ming, D. & Br \"u schweiler, R. (2004). J. Biomol. NMR, 29 , 363--368

work page 2004
[62]

& Kay, L

Mittermaier, A. & Kay, L. E. (2004). Prot. Sci. 13 , 1088--1099

work page 2004
[63]

Neria, E., Fischer, S., & Karplus, M. (1996). J. Chem. Phys. 105 , 1902--1921

work page 1996
[64]

G., Nardo, A

Northey, J. G., Nardo, A. D., & Davidson, A. R. (2002). Nature Struct. Biol. 9 , 126--130

work page 2002
[65]

& Karplus, M

Paci, E. & Karplus, M. (1999). J. Mol. Biol. 288 , 441--459

work page 1999
[66]

P., Dubay, K

Pawar, A. P., Dubay, K. F., Zurdo, J., Chiti, F., Vendruscolo, M., & Dobson, C. M. (2005). J. Mol. Biol. 350 , 379--392

work page 2005
[67]

Prompers, J. J. & Br \"u schweiler, R. (2000). J. Phys. Chem. B, 104 , 11416--11424

work page 2000
[68]

Qian, H. (1998). J. Chem. Phys. 109 , 10015--10017

work page 1998
[69]

F., Stock, A

Rasmussen, B. F., Stock, A. M., Ringe, D., & Petsko, G. A. (1992). Nature, 357 , 423--424

work page 1992
[70]

Ryckaert, J.-P., Ciccotti, G., & Berendsen, H. J. C. (1977). J. Comput. Phys. 23 , 327--341

work page 1977
[71]

Schwede, T., Kopp, J., Guex, N., & Peitsch, M. C. (2003). Nucleic Acids Res. 31 , 3381--3385

work page 2003
[72]

& Fersht, A

Serrano, L. & Fersht, A. R. (1989). Nature, 342 , 296--299

work page 1989
[73]

Serrano, L., Kellis, J. T. J., Cann, P., Matouschek, A., & Fersht, A. R. (1992). J. Mol. Biol. 224 , 783--804

work page 1992
[74]

Spyracopoulos, L. (2005). Prot. Pep. Lett. 12 , 235--240

work page 2005
[75]

Stone, M. J. (2001). Acc. Chem. Res. 34 , 379--388

work page 2001
[76]

J., Gupta, S., Snyder, N., & Regan, L

Stone, M. J., Gupta, S., Snyder, N., & Regan, L. (2001). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 123 , 185--186

work page 2001
[77]

K., Buckle, A

Vaughan, C. K., Buckle, A. M., & Fersht, A. R. (1999). J. Mol. Biol. 286 , 1487--1506

work page 1999
[78]

Wong, C. F. & McCammon, J. A. (2003). Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 43 , 31--45

work page 2003
[79]

O., Shortle, D., & Woolf, T

Wrabl, J. O., Shortle, D., & Woolf, T. B. (2000). Proteins, 38 , 123--133

work page 2000
[80]

& Kay, L

Yang, D. & Kay, L. E. (1996). J. Mol. Biol. 263 , 369--382

work page 1996

Showing first 80 references.