Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18854028›Full record

ArticleBMC evolutionary biology2008

Just how versatile are domains?

January Weiner, Andrew D Moore, Erich Bornberg-Bauer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC evolutionary biology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Grammar of protein domain architectures.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Unique function words characterize genomic proteins.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Evolution of Protein Domain Repeats in Metazoa.Molecular biology and evolution · 2016
    Article
  10. Article
  11. The language of the protein universe.Current opinion in genetics & development · 2015
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The interface of protein structure, protein biophysics, and molecular evolution.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2012
    Review
  20. 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

3 authors.

January WeinerInstitute for Evolution and Biodiversity, Evolutionary Bioinformatics Group, Westphalian Wilhelms-University, Münster, Germany. january@uni-muenster.de
Andrew D Moore
Erich Bornberg-Bauer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCreating new protein domain arrangements is a frequent mechanism of evolutionary innovation. While some domains always form the same combinations, others form many different arrangements. This ability, which is often referred to as versatility or promiscuity of domains, its a random evolutionary model in which a domain's promiscuity is based on its relative frequency of domains.

resultsWe show that there is a clear relationship across genomes between the promiscuity of a given domain and its frequency. However, the strength of this relationship differs for different domains. We thus redefine domain promiscuity by defining a new index, DV I ("domain versatility index"), which eliminates the effect of domain frequency. We explore links between a domain's versatility, when unlinked from abundance, and its biological properties.

conclusionOur results indicate that domains occurring as single domain proteins and domains appearing frequently at protein termini have a higher DV I. This is consistent with previous observations that the evolution of domain re-arrangements is primarily driven by fusion of pre-existing arrangements and single domains as well as loss of domains at protein termini. Furthermore, we studied the link between domain age, defined as the first appearance of a domain in the species tree, and the DV I. Contrary to previous studies based on domain promiscuity, it seems as if the DV I is age independent. Finally, we find that contrary to previously reported findings, versatility is lower in Eukaryotes. In summary, our measure of domain versatility indicates that a random attachment process is sufficient to explain the observed distribution of domain arrangements and that several views on domain promiscuity need to be revised.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularModels, GeneticAnimalsArchaeaBacteriaComputational BiologyDatabases, ProteinGenomeMicePrincipal Component AnalysisProtein Interaction Domains and Motifs

Identifiers

PMID18854028
PMCPMC2588589

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.