Redundancy vs. Method

Sequence Redundancy vs. Method
in the Protein Data Bank
April 2007 by Eric Martz for Protein Explorer.

*Contributor*	*Method*	*Entries*	*Portion* *NMR*	*Non-Redundant* *Sequences*¹
NOT Structural Genomics (90%)	X-Ray	~33,392	13%	20%
NOT Structural Genomics (90%)	NMR	5,025	13%	56%²
Structural Genomics (10%)⁵	X-Ray	3,189	26%	60%
Structural Genomics (10%)⁵	NMR	1,131	26%	57%
Total	X-Ray + NMR	42,813	15%	25%^3,4

<30% sequence identity using RCSB's method (see note 4 below).

17% of NMR results have ligand, while 76% of X-ray results have ligand. (65% of structural genomics X-ray results have ligand.)

Was the same, 25%, prior to structural genomics.

For "Total" non-redundant sequences, RCSB gives 25% (via global alignment) while OCA gives 16% (via local alignment).

Structural genomics has contributed 10% of all entries in the Protein Data Bank. 86% of entries from structural genomics were deposited since 2004. During this time, structural genomics contributed 20% of all new entries.