-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Our approach to labelling residues and linkages doesn't work for ano-ano linkages #165
Comments
There is a legitimate scientific reason for putting the anomeric configuration into the linkage. The monosaccharides generally interconvert between alpha, beta and linear when in solution. It is only at the stage of making a linkage that they are fixed into one of them. So, the creation of the linkage is important. But, I also see your point, and it is possible to have, say, a crystal of DGlcpa1-OH. I have no issues with splitting out the anomeric config from the linkage data. It might be better to separate it entirely rather than to put it back into the monosaccharide annotation, though I cringe at greater verbosity. Let's brainstorm a bit about all the reps. Re the images, my first thought is to put the a & b nearer the glyphs and have the 2-1 float more in the center. |
More detail of the underlying issue here; #165. For now I've added this code to add the anomericity of the rightmost ano-ano sugar back into the "orderedSequence" generated by gmml. Gems uses the orderedSequence and not the user supplied one, which is why it was not able to build ano-ano, while gmml could.
I can't do this at the sequenceParser level as it doesn't know which connection is the ano-ano for cases like DGlcpa1-2[LFucpa1-1]DFrufb. i.e. should it be a1-1a or a1-2a? There aren't atoms yet so I can't guess which one is the anomeric atom. Either I bring in metadata telling me it's 2 for Fru, or I do it at a later point when I know what the sugars are. |
Is there a reason not to bring in the metadata? I think this is one big
reason for the metadata to exist.
…On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 7:39 AM Oliver ***@***.***> wrote:
I can't do this at the sequenceParser level as it doesn't know which
connection is the ano-ano for cases like DGlcpa1-2[LFucpa1-1]DFrufb. i.e.
should it be a1-1a or a1-2a? There aren't atoms yet so I can't guess which
one is the anomeric atom. Either I bring in metadata telling me it's 2 for
Fru, or I do it at a later point when I know what the sugars are.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#165 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACCV7D76E64AJGQMWMDTDODYM7YBHAVCNFSM6AAAAAA77KMR2OVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQNZYGYYDGOBTGI>
.
You are receiving this because you were assigned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
:-) Lachele
***@***.***
lachelefoley.com
I'm happy people are learning that sleep is important. Now, please stop
trying to kill the nocturnal folks.
|
I wrote the comment as I'm not going to do it immediately, so just writing out both options. |
For non ano-ano linkages our current labeling system works fine:
IndexOrdered:
DNeu5Aca2-6DGalpb1-4DGlcpNAc[3S]b1-2DManpa1-3[DGlcpNAcb1-4][DManp[2S,3Me]a1-6DManpa1-6]DManpb1-4DGlcpNAc[6Me]b1-4DGlcpNAcb1-OH
IndexOrderedLabeled:
DNeu5Ac&Label=residue-14;a2-6&Label=link-12;DGalp&Label=residue-13;b1-4&Label=link-11;DGlcpNAc&Label=residue-12;[3&Label=link-13;S&Label=residue-15;]b1-2&Label=link-10;DManp&Label=residue-11;a1-3&Label=link-9;[DGlcpNAc&Label=residue-10;b1-4&Label=link-8;][DManp&Label=residue-7;[2&Label=link-7;S&Label=residue-9;,3&Label=link-6;Me&Label=residue-8;]a1-6&Label=link-5;DManp&Label=residue-6;a1-6&Label=link-4;]DManp&Label=residue-5;b1-4&Label=link-3;DGlcpNAc&Label=residue-3;[6&Label=link-2;Me&Label=residue-4;]b1-4&Label=link-1;DGlcpNAc&Label=residue-2;b1-&Label=link-0;OH&Label=residue-1;
However for ano-ano linkages, this means the "a" gets lost.
IndexOrdered:
DGlcpa1-1DGlcpa
IndexOrderedLabeled:
DGlcp&Label=residue-2;a1-1&Label=link-0;DGlcp&Label=residue-1;
Essentially it's because we put the alpha of DGlcpa into the linkage, and not the sugar residue. This follows the convention of what scientists do, i.e. we think like this:

But what's cleaner to program is that the linkage is e.g. "1-2" and the sugar should be "DGlcpa"
With the current approach I'm losing the a info for Glc

I'm not even sure where we would want the a to be in this representation?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: