PubMed2026
Accurate representation of metal ions in macromolecular structures is critical for chemical interpretation, computational modeling, and machine-learning methods that rely on Protein Data Bank (PDB) entries. However, the elemental identity of metals modeled in crystallographic structures is often inferred indirectly and rarely validated experimentally. Here, we combine Particle Induced X-ray Emission (PIXE) and X-ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy (XRFS) to determine the elemental composition of protein samples used to generate 70 deposited metalloprotein crystal structures. By analyzing the original protein material employed for crystallization, but before the addition of crystallization buffer solutions, we assess whether the modeled metal ions in deposited structures are consistent with experimentally detectable elemental content. We find that in a majority of cases, the metals modeled in the corresponding PDB entries are inconsistent with the metals present in the protein samples before crystallization, or that additional metals are present but not represented in the structural models. Spectroscopic results were integrated with automated crystallographic validation metrics, including real-space Z-difference (RSZD) analysis and systematic rerefinement, to evaluate atomic-number mismatch at metal sites. PIXE and XRFS show strong agreement for dominant elemental signals and provide complementary, scalable approaches for identifying suspect metal assignments. This work does not address physiological or functional metalation but instead highlights a widespread data integrity issue in deposited macromolecular structures, PDB-wide. These results establish an experimentally corroborated link between elemental identity and crystallographic validation metrics, enabling the large-scale detection of chemically inconsistent annotations in structural databases used for computational modeling and machine learning.