Login | ![]() |
![]() |
last update: September 30, 2020
Identify metrics most suitable for evaluating and comparing fit of atomic coordinate models into cryo-EM maps for specimens in the <4.0 Å reported overall resolution range.
Specific focus areas:
Questions: How reliable are ligands built into cryoEM maps at X resolution? Can ligand be placed automatically or is manual intervention needed?
• September 2020: Committee meets virtually to finalize targets, set guidelines for submissions, recommend evaluation procedures
The EMDR team recently reviewed over 70 recently determined cryo-EM structures containing drug-like compounds and selected those listed below as potential Challenge targets based on topical relevance and resolution range 2-3 Å. These were reviewed at the initial Committee Discussion on Sept. 11, where the following were prioritized:
Specimen | EMDB ID | PDB Reference | Ligand | Resol (Å) | citation | notes |
E. coli β-Galactosidase(EMPIAR 10061 original and reprocessed) | 6cvm |
PETG (enzyme inhibitor |
2.2-1.8 | half-maps are available | ||
SARS-CoV-2 RNA-dependent RNA polymerase | EMD-30210 | 7bv2 | Remdesivir (covalent inhibitor) | 2.5 | Yin2020 | half-maps requested |
E. coli 70S Ribosome (intended focus: 50S) | EMD-22586 | 7k00 | Paramomycin | 2.0 | Watson2020 | composite map, related focused refinement maps |
EMDataResource Validation Challenges are supported by NIH National Institute of General Medical Sciences
Please send your challenge questions, comments and feedback to challenges@emdataresource.org
Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer