Re: [Biopython] Overhauling of Bio.PDB module

Patrick Kunzmann <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.python.bio.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hello Joao,

sounds like a good idea. How do I join the 3DSIG Slack workspace?

Best regards,

Patrick Kunzmann


On 16.10.19 19:54, João Rodrigues wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
>
> Thank you again for bringing this up. I do agree with you that this is 
> a necessity.
>
> When Bio.PDB first showed up, there were not so many Python libraries 
> out there for molecular structures. Now there are a few, so we should 
> think carefully about what features we want to offer - not to overlap 
> with others and duplicate efforts. My opinion is that BioPython is 
> very good at generally handling structures, allowing you do change 
> fields, select bits, etc, and do very simple calculations like 
> distances or superimpositions. At the CodeFest in Basel, we talked 
> that it would be awesome to have a selection language built-in 
> bioptyhon to allow us to do something like `mol.select("chain 
> A").write("chain_A.pdb")`. This also requires an overhaul of the data 
> structures we use to store atomic data.
>
> I have some time in the next few months I could spare to work on this. 
> Interfacing with Biotite would be interesting as well (as well as with 
> other packages). I'll start a #biopython channel at the 3DSIG slack so 
> that we can coordinate efforts. How does this sound?
>
> Cheers and again, thanks for bringing this up!
>
> Joao
>
> Patrick Kunzmann <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> escreveu no dia quarta, 16/10/2019 
> à(s) 09:38:
>
>     Hello Biopythoneers,
>
>     at the BOSC this year we talked about overhauling the Bio.PDB module.
>     The problem is that currently the atom coordinates are stored in a
>     separate NumPy array for each atom. This design prevents efficient
>     computation of all kinds of analyses (distances, angles,
>     superimpositions, etc.). One proposed possible solution to this
>     problem,
>     we talked about, was to put the coordinates of the entire
>     structure in
>     one NumPy array, and let the Atom, Residue, Chain and Structure
>     objects
>     point to positions in this array. The benefit of this approach is
>     that
>     functions could be directly applied onto the entire array, harnessing
>     the power of vectorization.
>
>     For the analysis we could adapt the vectorized functions from the
>     Python
>     package Biotite, a project I am currently working on
>     (https://www.biotite-python.org/apidoc/biotite.structure.html).
>     Usually,
>     these functions already accept the coordinates as NumPy array, so I
>     think only a few tweaks would be necessary for every function.
>
>     However, we would require one person or a small team who makes the
>     effort to implement the new structure types and adapts the analysis
>     functions. I could offer a pair of helping hands in the adaption
>     of the
>     analysis functions, but I don't have the time for anything more.
>
>     So the question is: Is there anyone out there, who is willing to
>     do this
>     work? Alternatively, I would propose to write a 'bridge' package
>     between
>     Biopython and Biotite, that converts the Biopython structure
>     representation into the representation in Biotite and vice versa. I
>     think, this solution is less elegant but would also require less
>     effort.
>
>     Best regards
>
>     Patrick Kunzmann
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Biopython mailing list  - [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     https://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biopython
>

_______________________________________________
Biopython mailing list  -  [email protected]
https://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biopython
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.