Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17496920›Full record

ReviewOncogene2007

Systems biology analysis of G protein and MAP kinase signaling in yeast.

N Hao, M Behar, T C Elston, H G Dohlman

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Oncogene, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A shadow detector for photosynthesis efficiency.Journal of theoretical biology · 2017
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. From Physics to Pharmacology?Reports on progress in physics. Physical Society (Great Britain) · 2011
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Four-dimensional dynamics of MAPK information processing systems.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Systems biology and medicine
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

N HaoDepartment of Pharmacology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7365, USA.
M Behar
T C Elston
H G Dohlman
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Approximately a third of all drugs act by binding directly to cell surface receptors coupled to G proteins. Other drugs act indirectly on these same pathways, for example, by inhibiting neurotransmitter reuptake or by blocking the inactivation of intracellular second messengers. These drugs have revolutionized the treatment of human disease. However, the complexity of G protein signaling mechanisms has significantly hampered our ability to identify additional new drug targets. Moreover, today's molecular pharmacologists are accustomed to working on narrowly focused problems centered on a single protein or enzymatic process. Here we describe emerging efforts in yeast aimed at identifying proteins and processes that modulate the function of receptors, G proteins and MAP kinase effectors. The scope of these efforts is far more systematic, comprehensive and quantitative than anything attempted previously, and includes integrated approaches in genetics, proteomics and computational biology.

Indexed as

GTP-Binding ProteinsHumansMAP Kinase Signaling SystemMitogen-Activated Protein KinasesSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsSystems BiologyGTP-Binding ProteinsMitogen-Activated Protein KinasesSaccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins

Identifiers

PMID17496920
OpenAlexW2051338800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.