journal menu
![[Figure 1]](ni5031fig1mag.jpg)
|
|
Figure 1
Workflow for the validation of helical parameters in the EMDB. (a) A diagram illustrating helical symmetry. (b) The 2D lattice resulting from unwrapping the helical lattice shown in (a). The lattices shown in (a) and (b) were generated using the HelicalLattice web app with twist = 57°, rise = 200 Å, C3 axial symmetry and radius = 500 Å. To reproduce these plots, visit https://helical-lattice.streamlit.app/?diameter=1000&length=4000&rise=200&twist=57&csym=3&rot=10&tilt=10&draw_cylinder=1&draw_axis=1&marker_size=10. (c) Validation workflow. This workflow illustrates the validation process for the helical parameters (twist, rise and axial symmetry) of the helical structure entries in the EMDB. The deposited helical parameters (red) are retrieved from the metadata of EMDB entries, while the validated helical parameters (green) are determined using HI3D. The vector difference and relative difference between these two sets of helical parameters are compared. To assess the validity of each parameter set, the corresponding density maps were central-sliced at three times the helical rise and were symmetrized into full-length helical densities based on either the deposited parameters or the HI3D parameters. The similarity between the symmetrized map and the original density map was evaluated using a cross-correlation scoring metric. The parameter set yielding a significantly higher cross-correlation score is considered to be a better representation of the density map. |
![[Figure 1]](ni5031fig1.jpg)
 | STRUCTURAL BIOLOGY |
ISSN: 2059-7983
Open 
access
access
