You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
chem.show_binding_affinities() # Review the values we have given for the binding affinities
@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@
73
73
aff.chemical
74
74
75
75
# %%
76
-
aff.affinity
76
+
aff.Kd
77
77
78
78
# %%
79
79
@@ -115,19 +115,19 @@
115
115
dynamics.describe_state()
116
116
117
117
# %%
118
-
dynamics.chem_data.show_binding_affinities() # Review the values the had given for the binding affinities
118
+
dynamics.chem_data.show_binding_affinities() # Review the values we had given for the dissociation constants
119
119
120
120
# %% [markdown]
121
121
# #### Notes:
122
122
# **[B] = 0** => Occupancy of binding site 8 of M1 is also zero
123
123
#
124
124
# **[A] = 10.0** :
125
-
# * 10x the binding affinity of A to site 3 of M1 (resulting in occupancy 0.9)
126
-
# * same as the binding affinity of A to site 15 of M1 (occupancy 0.5)
127
-
# * 1,000x the binding affinity of A to site 2 of M2 (occupancy almost 1, i.e. nearly saturated)
125
+
# * 10x the dissociation constant of A to site 3 of M1 (resulting in occupancy 0.9)
126
+
# * same as the dissociation constant of A to site 15 of M1 (occupancy 0.5)
127
+
# * 1,000x the dissociation constant of A to site 2 of M2 (occupancy almost 1, i.e. nearly saturated)
128
128
#
129
129
#
130
-
# **[C] = 0.56** => 1/10 of the binding affinity of C to site 1 of M2 (occupancy 0.1)
130
+
# **[C] = 0.56** => 1/10 of the dissociation constant of C to site 1 of M2 (occupancy 0.1)
131
131
132
132
# %%
133
133
@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@
144
144
dynamics.describe_state()
145
145
146
146
# %% [markdown]
147
-
# #### Note how all the various binding sites for ligand A, across all macromolecules, now have a different value for the fractional occupancy (very close to 1 because of the large value of [A] relative to each of the binding affinities for A.)
147
+
# #### Note how all the various binding sites for ligand A, across all macromolecules, now have a different value for the fractional occupancy (very close to 1 because of the large value of [A] relative to each of the dissociation constants for A.)
148
148
# The fractional occupancies for the other ligands (B and C) did not change
149
149
150
150
# %%
@@ -159,7 +159,7 @@
159
159
print(history)
160
160
161
161
# %%
162
-
# Generate a sweep of [A] values along a log scale
162
+
# Generate a sweep of [A] values along a log scale, from very low to very high (relative to the dissociation constants)
163
163
start=0.001
164
164
stop=200.
165
165
num_points=100
@@ -214,11 +214,14 @@
214
214
215
215
# Annotations (x values adjusted for the log scale)
additional_y_values= [0.1, 0.5, 0.9] # Additional values to show on y-axis
@@ -232,13 +235,19 @@
232
235
fig.show()
233
236
234
237
# %% [markdown]
235
-
# Note that fractional occupancy 0.1 occurs at ligand concentrations of 1/10 the binding affinity;
236
-
# occupancy 0.5 occurs at ligand concentrations equals to the binding affinity;
237
-
# occupancy 0.9 occurs at ligand concentrations of 10x the binding affinity
238
+
# #### When the binding affinity is lower (i.e. higher Dissociation Constant, Kd, orange curve), it takes higher ligand concentrations to attain the same fractional occupancies
239
+
240
+
# %% [markdown]
241
+
# Note that fractional occupancy 0.1 occurs at ligand concentrations of 1/10 the dissociation constant (Kd);
242
+
# occupancy 0.5 occurs at ligand concentrations equals to the dissociation constant;
243
+
# occupancy 0.9 occurs at ligand concentrations of 10x the dissociation constant.
238
244
239
245
# %% [markdown]
240
246
# ## The above simulation captures what's shown on Fig. 3A of
0 commit comments