Placeholder image of a protein
Icon representing a puzzle

1510: Aflatoxin Challenge: Round 8

Closed since almost 8 years ago

Intermediate Overall Design

Summary


Created
April 18, 2018
Expires
Max points
100
Description

Redesign the active site to bind aflatoxin! This puzzle uses the same starting structure as Round 7 of the Aflatoxin Challenge, but now players may insert up to 20 extra residues into the designable loops, at a cost of 20 points per residue. Parts of the scaffold protein have been trimmed to reduce the size of the puzzle, and we've upweighted ligand interactions by a factor of five. We'd like to see if Foldit players can design proteins that make more interactions with the ligand! See the blog for more details.



Aflatoxins are a class of poisonous compounds that contaminate a significant portion of the global food supply. In this puzzle, players are challenged to redesign an enzyme that could break down aflatoxin molecules. The majority of the protein is frozen, with the aflatoxin ligand fixed in a binding pocket. Surrounding the binding pocket are a number of loops that might be redesigned without affecting the folding stability of the protein. In these loops, players may manipulate the protein backbone and mutate the residue sidechains. Redesign the loops of this protein to better bind the aflatoxin ligand!



This is the eighth puzzle of our Aflatoxin Challenge, sponsored by Mars Inc. and Thermo Fisher Scientific. Promising designs will be tested by the Siegel Lab at UC Davis. By participating in the challenge/game, the players agree that all player designs will be available permanently in the public domain, and the players will not seek intellectual property protection over the designs created as part of the challenge/game.

Top groups


  1. Avatar for Go Science 100 pts. 13,971
  2. Avatar for Beta Folders 2. Beta Folders 71 pts. 13,924
  3. Avatar for Void Crushers 3. Void Crushers 49 pts. 13,900
  4. Avatar for Anthropic Dreams 4. Anthropic Dreams 33 pts. 13,872
  5. Avatar for Contenders 5. Contenders 22 pts. 13,862
  6. Avatar for Gargleblasters 6. Gargleblasters 14 pts. 13,822
  7. Avatar for HMT heritage 7. HMT heritage 8 pts. 13,795
  8. Avatar for Marvin's bunch 8. Marvin's bunch 5 pts. 13,370
  9. Avatar for L'Alliance Francophone 9. L'Alliance Francophone 3 pts. 13,316
  10. Avatar for Team China 10. Team China 2 pts. 13,071

  1. Avatar for YeshuaLives 41. YeshuaLives Lv 1 23 pts. 13,333
  2. Avatar for lconor 42. lconor Lv 1 22 pts. 13,332
  3. Avatar for Anfinsen_slept_here 43. Anfinsen_slept_here Lv 1 21 pts. 13,329
  4. Avatar for froggs554 44. froggs554 Lv 1 20 pts. 13,324
  5. Avatar for johngran 45. johngran Lv 1 20 pts. 13,323
  6. Avatar for alcor29 46. alcor29 Lv 1 19 pts. 13,323
  7. Avatar for Reldas 47. Reldas Lv 1 18 pts. 13,320
  8. Avatar for Alistair69 48. Alistair69 Lv 1 17 pts. 13,316
  9. Avatar for christioanchauvin 49. christioanchauvin Lv 1 16 pts. 13,306
  10. Avatar for WBarme1234 50. WBarme1234 Lv 1 16 pts. 13,296

Comments


Bletchley Park Lv 1

"we've upweighted ligand interactions by a factor of five"
In what way are the interactions valued ? How does the scoring for these interactions take place ?
I find little score benefit from a bonding sidechain versus a non-bonding sidechain.