4.8 Review

Selective ion binding and transport by membrane proteins - A computational perspective

期刊

COORDINATION CHEMISTRY REVIEWS
卷 345, 期 -, 页码 108-136

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2017.03.019

关键词

Inorganic ions; Ion channels and transporters; Ion selectivity; Ion permeation; Quantum mechanics; Molecular dynamics

资金

  1. University of Calgary Eyes High Postdoctoral Fellowship
  2. AIHS
  3. CIHR
  4. AITF
  5. NSERC
  6. National Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) (Discovery Grants) [RGPIN-315019, RGPIN-2014-06606]
  7. Alberta Innovates [201400451] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Inorganic ions are critical for cellular function and require an efficient mechanism of transport through the cellular membrane. Most often the transport of ions occurs through proteins known as ion channels and transporters. Ion binding and permeation through these proteins is a complicated process that is still under investigation with a wide range of experimental and theoretical methods. Here we present an overview of some of the competing theories of ion transport with special emphasis on the theoretical methods used for the elucidation of the energetics of ion selectivity, coordination and permeation. A large part of the review is dedicated to potassium and sodium channels and transporters, which are among the best studied biological transport systems and provide a frame of reference for all other ion-protein interactions. In addition, we summarize the computational work done on the transport of several other small inorganic ions (calcium, magnesium, chloride, inorganic phosphate). Our aim is to provide a general picture of the current state of knowledge on biological ion-transport phenomena and to evaluate the capabilities of modern computational methods when applied to ion transport. We also strive to draw attention to some underdeveloped areas of ion transport that require further investigation. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据