Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20081223›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2010

Protein secondary structure appears to be robust under in silico evolution while protein disorder appears not to be.

Christian Schaefer, Avner Schlessinger, Burkhard Rost

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Evolution of Intrinsic Disorder in Protein Loops.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Exploring the Peptide Potential of Genomes.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Hidden dynamic signatures drive substrate selectivity in the disordered phosphoproteome.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Evolution of intrinsic disorder in eukaryotic proteins.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2017
    Review
  12. An Evolution-Based Approach to De Novo Protein Design.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2017
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christian SchaeferDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, Center for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics (C2B2), Columbia University, 1130 St Nicholas Ave., New York, NY 10032, USA. schaefer@rostlab.org
Avner Schlessinger
Burkhard Rost
Columbia University · US

Funding

Comprehensive annotation of subcellular localization of entire organismsR01GM079767 · NIGMS · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI ROST, BURKHARD · 2007 to 2010
$1.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM079767NIGMS NIH HHS R01-GM079767
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationThe mutation of amino acids often impacts protein function and structure. Mutations without negative effect sustain evolutionary pressure. We study a particular aspect of structural robustness with respect to mutations: regular protein secondary structure and natively unstructured (intrinsically disordered) regions. Is the formation of regular secondary structure an intrinsic feature of amino acid sequences, or is it a feature that is lost upon mutation and is maintained by evolution against the odds? Similarly, is disorder an intrinsic sequence feature or is it difficult to maintain? To tackle these questions, we in silico mutated native protein sequences into random sequence-like ensembles and monitored the change in predicted secondary structure and disorder.

resultsWe established that by our coarse-grained measures for change, predictions and observations were similar, suggesting that our results were not biased by prediction mistakes. Changes in secondary structure and disorder predictions were linearly proportional to the change in sequence. Surprisingly, neither the content nor the length distribution for the predicted secondary structure changed substantially. Regions with long disorder behaved differently in that significantly fewer such regions were predicted after a few mutation steps. Our findings suggest that the formation of regular secondary structure is an intrinsic feature of random amino acid sequences, while the formation of long-disordered regions is not an intrinsic feature of proteins with disordered regions. Put differently, helices and strands appear to be maintained easily by evolution, whereas maintaining disordered regions appears difficult. Neutral mutations with respect to disorder are therefore very unlikely.

Indexed as

Protein Structure, SecondaryAmino Acid SequenceComputational BiologyDatabases, ProteinProtein FoldingProteinsProteins

Identifiers

PMID20081223
PMCPMC2828120
OpenAlexW2165967770

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.