Abstract
Attempts to answer the Levinthal question "How proteins fold to give such a unique structure" are discussed. In the first part of this article, we focus on a few reasons as to why the solution to the protein-folding problem (PFP) has been elusive for a very long time. One is a result of the misinterpretation of Anfinsen's Thermodynamic hypothesis which led to the conclusion that the native structure of a protein must be at a global minimum of the Gibbs energy. The second is the result of the adherence to the hydrophobic paradigm, and at the same time ignoring a whole repertoire of hydrophilic effects. It is argued that switching from a target-based to a caused-based approach, and adopting the hydrophilic paradigm leads straightforwardly to a simple answer to Levinthal's question, as well as to a solution of the PFP.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 113-124 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics |
| Volume | 30 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2012 |
Keywords
- Anfinsen's hypothesis
- Hydrophilic effects
- Hydrophilic forces
- Hydrophobic
- Levinthal's question
- Protein folding
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Levinthal's question revisited, and answered'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver