-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 95
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Update aa_residues_substructures_explicit_bond_orders_with_caps_expli… #1728
Update aa_residues_substructures_explicit_bond_orders_with_caps_expli… #1728
Conversation
…cit_connectivity.json
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for starting on the fix for this!
Patching that file will only solve the problem temporarily, since we periodically regenerate it from the chemical components dictionary using this script. Also, I'm seeing CYS residues in our current dictionary with a negative sulfur. So either there's something wrong with a existing substructure in this file that's causing it not to match the deprotonated CYS in the input, or the mainchain substructure is fully missing.
It'd be great if we could solve the problem by substituting an existing substructure in the _patch_known_problems
function, but barring that, just adding a new working substructure in the _add_common_substructures
function would be fine.
Updated cif to substructure to generate CYM substructure
RDKitToolkitWrapper()._validate_custom_substructures() actually requires Dict[str, List[str]]
…cit_connectivity.json Updated list of aa_residues_substructures obtained with new code
Fixed typo in the _validate_custom_substructures docstring
I think that the changes I added should lead to generation of the correct |
Wow - Thanks for diving into our crazy substructure code! The resulting patterns look good visually but I tried loading the PDB file from your original post and it failed with:
I tried shaking a few permutations of things like residue names, but to no avail. Are you able to load the original PDB successfully? In either case, I have an example file and test we can hammer on, but I don't have write access to your fork to send it over. Would you be OK if I merged this into a branch so OpenEye CI stops complaining, and then gave you write access? |
This is strange. With updated
Yes, this is fine with me. |
#1729) * Update aa_residues_substructures_explicit_bond_orders_with_caps_expli… (#1728) * Update aa_residues_substructures_explicit_bond_orders_with_caps_explicit_connectivity.json * Update _cif_to_substructure_dict.py Updated cif to substructure to generate CYM substructure * Update _cif_to_substructure_dict.py RDKitToolkitWrapper()._validate_custom_substructures() actually requires Dict[str, List[str]] * Update aa_residues_substructures_explicit_bond_orders_with_caps_explicit_connectivity.json Updated list of aa_residues_substructures obtained with new code * Update rdkit_wrapper.py Fixed typo in the _validate_custom_substructures docstring * add cym loading test and input * update releasehistory * fix cym test * regenerate all substructure jsons --------- Co-authored-by: pbuslaev <pbuslaev@gmail.com>
This patch should solve #1727