Back

Conformational ensembles of flexible multidomain proteins: How close are we to accurate and reliable predictions?

Rodriguez, S.; Fournet, A.; Bartels, S.; Pajkos, M.; Clerc, I.; Carriere, L.; Thureau, A.; Montanier, C.; Dumon, C.; Allemand, F.; Cortes, J.; Bernado, P.

2026-02-25 biophysics
10.64898/2026.02.24.707687 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Multidomain proteins connected by flexible linkers populate conformational ensembles that are challenging to characterize using conventional structural biology methods. In domain-linker-domain (DLD) proteins, linker-mediated inter-domain relative positions and orientations are functionally relevant, yet their dynamical behavior in solution normally remain poorly described. Small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) provides ensemble-averaged structural information for such systems; however, coupling with computational modeling is required to accurately describe the dynamic behavior of this family of proteins in solution. Here, we present a systematic evaluation of five ensemble-generation strategies applied to a set of eighteen proteins sharing the same two globular domains, connected by naturally occurring linkers of varying length and composition. Modeling methods based on different underlying principles are compared by assessing their agreement to experimental SAXS data, showing a large disparity and systematic structural biases among them. Furthermore, for each approach, we examine the effect of refinement against SAXS restraints and assess its capacity to describe the experimental data, as well as the induced biases in global dimensions and inter-domain distance distributions. This analysis underlines the importance of the initial conformational pool for deriving experimentally compatible ensembles. Overall, this work provides a high-quality benchmark for SAXS-driven ensemble modeling of flexible, multidomain proteins and establishes a framework for the critical interpretation of solution scattering data in systems with pronounced conformational heterogeneity.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Biophysical Journal
545 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
12.1%
2
Protein Science
221 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.8%
3
The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters
58 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.9%
4
Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
82 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.6%
5
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
207 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
6.1%
6
Structure
175 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.1%
7
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 29%
4.2%
50% of probability mass above
8
The Journal of Physical Chemistry B
158 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.8%
9
Journal of Molecular Biology
217 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.5%
10
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 11%
3.5%
11
Acta Crystallographica Section D Structural Biology
54 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.1%
12
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
100 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.0%
13
IUCrJ
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.0%
14
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
126 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.3%
15
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.8%
16
Journal of Structural Biology
58 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.6%
17
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
453 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.6%
18
Physical Biology
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
19
Journal of Applied Crystallography
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.3%
20
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.3%
21
International Journal of Biological Macromolecules
65 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
22
European Biophysics Journal
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
23
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.7%
24
ACS Omega
90 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
25
Biochemistry
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
26
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 66%
0.6%
27
Journal of Structural Biology: X
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%