Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18844985›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2008

Homology modelling of protein-protein complexes: a simple method and its possibilities and limitations.

Guillaume Launay, Thomas Simonson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. SEOR2 in Arabidopsis mediates CaScientific reports · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Expanding the conformational selection paradigm in protein-ligand docking.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2012
    Article
  13. Article
  14. GWIDD: Genome-wide protein docking database.Nucleic acids research · 2010
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

2 authors.

Guillaume LaunayLaboratoire de Biochimie (UMR CNRS 7654), Department of Biology, Ecole Polytechnique, 91128, Palaiseau, France. guillaume.launay@irisa.fr
Thomas Simonson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStructure-based computational methods are needed to help identify and characterize protein-protein complexes and their function. For individual proteins, the most successful technique is homology modelling. We investigate a simple extension of this technique to protein-protein complexes. We consider a large set of complexes of known structures, involving pairs of single-domain proteins. The complexes are compared with each other to establish their sequence and structural similarities and the relation between the two. Compared to earlier studies, a simpler dataset, a simpler structural alignment procedure, and an additional energy criterion are used. Next, we compare the Xray structures to models obtained by threading the native sequence onto other, homologous complexes. An elementary requirement for a successful energy function is to rank the native structure above any threaded structure. We use the DFIREbeta energy function, whose quality and complexity are typical of the models used today. Finally, we compare near-native models to distinctly non-native models.

resultsIf weakly stable complexes are excluded (defined by a binding energy cutoff), as well as a few unusual complexes, a simple homology principle holds: complexes that share more than 35% sequence identity share similar structures and interaction modes; this principle was less clearcut in earlier studies. The energy function was then tested for its ability to identify experimental structures among sets of decoys, produced by a simple threading procedure. On average, the experimental structure is ranked above 92% of the alternate structures. Thus, discrimination of the native structure is good but not perfect. The discrimination of near-native structures is fair. Typically, a single, alternate, non-native binding mode exists that has a native-like energy. Some of the associated failures may correspond to genuine, alternate binding modes and/or native complexes that are artefacts of the crystal environment. In other cases, additional model filtering with more sophisticated tools is needed.

conclusionThe results suggest that the simple modelling procedure applied here could help identify and characterize protein-protein complexes. The next step is to apply it on a genomic scale.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsStructural Homology, ProteinProtein BindingProtein ConformationProtein Interaction Domains and MotifsProteinsProteins

Identifiers

PMID18844985
PMCPMC2586029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.