Figure 2
Panel (A) shows a representative protein stability curve expressed as its Gibbs free energy of folding (ΔGf) across temperature. The stability curve exhibits two melting points where it crosses the x-axis, and a peak of stability where the curve has its most negative y value. Horizontal and vertical arrows represent the changes to protein stability predicted by HoTMuSiC and PoPMuSiC respectively (ΔTm and ΔΔGf). Panel (B) shows the ΔTm predicted by HoTMuSiC to enzymes from psychrophiles, mesophiles, and thermophiles as a result of single amino acid mutations. Panel (C) shows the ΔΔGf predicted by PoPMuSiC to enzymes from psychrophiles, mesophiles, and thermophiles. All data points are plotted with the mean ± the SEM. * represent the statistical significance results from Dunnett’s T3 multiple comparisons tests for panel (B) and Tukey’s multiple comparisons tests for panel (C) (* = P<0.05, ** = P<0.01, *** = P<0.001, ns = not significant).
The effects of mutations to temperature-adapted enzymes

Panel (A) shows a representative protein stability curve expressed as its Gibbs free energy of folding (ΔGf) across temperature. The stability curve exhibits two melting points where it crosses the x-axis, and a peak of stability where the curve has its most negative y value. Horizontal and vertical arrows represent the changes to protein stability predicted by HoTMuSiC and PoPMuSiC respectively (ΔTm and ΔΔGf). Panel (B) shows the ΔTm predicted by HoTMuSiC to enzymes from psychrophiles, mesophiles, and thermophiles as a result of single amino acid mutations. Panel (C) shows the ΔΔGf predicted by PoPMuSiC to enzymes from psychrophiles, mesophiles, and thermophiles. All data points are plotted with the mean ± the SEM. * represent the statistical significance results from Dunnett’s T3 multiple comparisons tests for panel (B) and Tukey’s multiple comparisons tests for panel (C) (* = P<0.05, ** = P<0.01, *** = P<0.001, ns = not significant).

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal