PMC:2728246 / 46729-48597 JSONTXT

{"project":"2_test","denotations":[{"id":"19652920-16276548-56190994","span":{"begin":928,"end":932},"obj":"16276548"}],"text":"In Figure 5a and b, the order parameters of methyl groups are plotted against the order parameters of the same (i) and of the following (i + 1) NH group over different time scales and the linear correlation coefficients are summarized in Table 2. For pairs of values where the correlation is deemed “significant” based on p-values smaller than 0.1 (probability that this correlation would occur by chance, in brackets), a few observation can be made. On all time scales, S2(CCi) show better correlation with S2(NHi) than with S2(NHi+1). This is the case for fs-ms dynamics with Pearson coefficients of ri = 0.49 and ri+1 = 0.34, as well as for fs-ns dynamics  = 0.60 and  = 0.41. These numbers show that a possible mechanism of transfer of motion from the side chain to the backbone is more prevalent from the side chain to the amide group of the same residue than to the next one as has been postulated earlier (Lakomek et al. 2005).\nFig. 5 Correlation of RDC-based order parameters from side chains at residue position i from methyl Cγ (full circles) and Cδ (open circles) with RDC-based backbone NH order parameters at the corresponding i and i + 1 positions taken from (Lakomek et al. 2008a). Short and long dashed lines correspond to the linear function fitting for Cγ and Cδ order parameters\nTable 2 Pearson correlation coefficient of side chain and backbone order parameters over various time scales\nTime scale Order parameters S2(NHi)a,b No. of data S2(NHi+1)a,b No. of data\nfs–ms (CCi) 0.49 (0.006) 30 0.34 (0.07) 29\n(CCγi) 0.50 (0.06) 15 0.19 (0.52) 13\n(CCδi) 0.46 (0.11) 13 0.26 (0.37) 14\nfs–ns (CCi) 0.60 (0.003) 23 0.41 (0.06) 22\n(CCγi) −0.17 (0.58) 13 0.36 (0.33) 9\n(CCδi) 0.76 (0.02) 9 0.48 (0.10) 13\naNumber in brackets is the null-hypothesis p-value\nbOnly correlations in bold are considered significant. All the others (in italic) are not significant"}