I have used both software for calculating the 𝚫𝚫G, although they both have different sine convention for defining protein stability/destability. For example what I have observed in my result is that the residue position G174V has positive value by FoldX (Stable ) but the same residue position I have checked Through DynaMut has also shows positive value (desatable). So my question is why am getting different results for the same residue position in different software?? As per my knowledge I think the difference might lies be in the methodology used for calculating the 𝚫𝚫G, as FoldX uses linear combination method where as DynaMut uses supervised machine learning methods which were built using the Random Forest algorithm from the scikit-learn Python library. The predictions are generated as output from the algorithm. so does any one knows where find the research article where they have discussed about the algorithm used for calculating 𝚫𝚫G by DynaMut ??
Have a look at : https://www.rosettacommons.org/demos/latest/public/calculate_protein_protein_ddg/README
Article DDGun: An untrained method for the prediction of protein sta...
https://cyrusbio.com/wp-content/uploads/DDG-v2.pdf
http://biosig.unimelb.edu.au/dynamut/run_example_prediction
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Computer Science and Engineering
- Programming Languages
- Python