Nature paper submitted
as of last week, we submitted the Nature paper. We think it has some very exciting findings, all of which are trying to uncover the amazing process that happens through game play. We analyzed things from many different angles producing some very interesting figures. We'll share them with you as soon as we hear from Nature. One interesting thing about our paper is that in the author list we added "and < 100,000 Foldit players". Surely the largest author list ever, but we're still not sure if Nature will balk at that format.
At this point three things can happen: they reject the paper, they reject it with specific suggestions on how to strengthen the results (which implies subsequent resubmission), or accept. I am guessing we should know in a month or so. Fingers crossed.( Posted by zoran 81 2394 | Thu, 02/04/2010 - 23:03 | 2 comments )
Digital media and learning competition: help needed
As you know, for a while now we have been excited about the educational possibilities of foldit. Every week we get a new set of requests to setup puzzles as class homework at some university.
We plan to spend some of our time to make these things easier. Recently, we've submitted a proposal to extend foldit to become a biochemistry tool for middle- and high-school students. To read about it and help us win the grant, please go to the below link and post a comment: the open-to-public feedback session will soon be closed, so time is limited.
Thanks for your help.( Posted by zoran 81 2394 | Mon, 02/01/2010 - 17:30 | 2 comments )
Recipes Are Back or Where Are the Ratings
Recipes are once again available on this site for players to use, share, comment and vote on. Recipes allow players to record sequences of actions and apply them at a different time or to a different puzzle. Players can download others' recipes into their cookbook and use them to do all kinds of nutty things to proteins. The listing of all publicly available recipes can be found here. In addition to saving players lots of time, recipes have the potential to provide an invaluable insight into the way humans solve protein folding. Thus, we encourage players to create, share, use, comment and vote on recipes as much as possible.
In order to create room for the link to the recipes page in the top navigation menu, we removed the links to groups and player pages. They are now accessible using the tabbed block at right of most pages. Select Evolvers tab and click on the FULL link at the bottom of the block to see the rating of individual players. To access the ratings of groups, select Groups tab and click on the FULL link.( Posted by ilya.makedon 81 2394 | Thu, 01/21/2010 - 01:00 | 0 comments )
The first round of results on designed fibronectin are in....
We have previously described the design problem of improving fibronectin and we chose to produce a design by BootsMcGraw. The results are in, but unfortunately the product did not show an improvement in stability. The bacteria made the protein just fine, but it was largely insoluble. This happens usually when the protein produced by the bacteria is not properly folded and started to aggregate as it was being produced so they never had the chance of folding to the target structure. What usually happens next is that a biochemist will carefully solubilize the protein and refold it by keeping it at a low concentration while reducing the amount of denaturants. This way the protein will hopefully fold to its shape first before clumping together and crash out of the solution. To be thorough, our collaborator at USC did exactly that, but we never obtained any soluble protein even after this process.
As described previously, the design by BootsMcGraw was chosen because it has the most balanced qualities according to our force field, namely it was very well packed, got good scores, and was evaluated to have few unsatisfied hydrogen bonding groups. We knew from the start that the sequence was more hydrophobic than what one would expect from an all-beta protein, but we decided to try it since the model buried the hydrophobic groups quite nicely and it was folded correctly by the automated fold-prediction algorithm. The experimental evidence suggests that the scores can be deceptive and if we allow backbones to move relatively freely, it was easy for users to over-pack the core and made them insoluble. This is of course only part of the problem, and the same happens when we run automated design. There were also published evidence that the loops we allow users to mutate may be important for stability (we allow users to change them since FoldIt is setup for users to explore the folding landscape, we are hoping to get better answers than the wildtype). All these should be taken into account for our next round.
Subsequently we've posted a puzzle on the same protein. we locked the backbone structure while imposing constraints to allow mutations only within the amino acids used by proteins with high homology. The results we recovered were quite encouraging, since we got back designed sequences very much like the wildtype even when a poly-alanine was given to the users to start. Interestingly, after collecting the top designed sequences, we realized that most of the mutations suggested by FoldIt players were already tested in a research paper. Some mutations maintained the stability, but none of which improved it.
We are tweaking the puzzle and will try again soon.
Possu( Posted by possu 81 2394 | Tue, 12/22/2009 - 19:30 | 3 comments )