Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20300652›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2010

Quantitative comparison of catalytic mechanisms and overall reactions in convergently evolved enzymes: implications for classification of enzyme function.

Daniel E Almonacid, Emmanuel R Yera, John B O Mitchell, Patricia C Babbitt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Profiling the orphan enzymes.Biology direct · 2014
    Review
  7. The evolution of enzyme function in the isomerases.Current opinion in structural biology · 2014
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Enzyme informatics.Current topics in medicinal chemistry · 2012
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Toward mechanistic classification of enzyme functions.Current opinion in chemical biology · 2011
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Daniel E AlmonacidDepartment of Bioengineering and Therapeutic Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Emmanuel R Yera
John B O Mitchell
Patricia C Babbitt
QB3 · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of St Andrews · GB

Funding

Laying the Foundation of Genomic EnzymologyR01GM060595 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI BABBITT, PATRICIA CLEMENT · 2000 to 2018
$5.4M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM060595NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM60595
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Functionally analogous enzymes are those that catalyze similar reactions on similar substrates but do not share common ancestry, providing a window on the different structural strategies nature has used to evolve required catalysts. Identification and use of this information to improve reaction classification and computational annotation of enzymes newly discovered in the genome projects would benefit from systematic determination of reaction similarities. Here, we quantified similarity in bond changes for overall reactions and catalytic mechanisms for 95 pairs of functionally analogous enzymes (non-homologous enzymes with identical first three numbers of their EC codes) from the MACiE database. Similarity of overall reactions was computed by comparing the sets of bond changes in the transformations from substrates to products. For similarity of mechanisms, sets of bond changes occurring in each mechanistic step were compared; these similarities were then used to guide global and local alignments of mechanistic steps. Using this metric, only 44% of pairs of functionally analogous enzymes in the dataset had significantly similar overall reactions. For these enzymes, convergence to the same mechanism occurred in 33% of cases, with most pairs having at least one identical mechanistic step. Using our metric, overall reaction similarity serves as an upper bound for mechanistic similarity in functional analogs. For example, the four carbon-oxygen lyases acting on phosphates (EC 4.2.3) show neither significant overall reaction similarity nor significant mechanistic similarity. By contrast, the three carboxylic-ester hydrolases (EC 3.1.1) catalyze overall reactions with identical bond changes and have converged to almost identical mechanisms. The large proportion of enzyme pairs that do not show significant overall reaction similarity (56%) suggests that at least for the functionally analogous enzymes studied here, more stringent criteria could be used to refine definitions of EC sub-subclasses for improved discrimination in their classification of enzyme reactions. The results also indicate that mechanistic convergence of reaction steps is widespread, suggesting that quantitative measurement of mechanistic similarity can inform approaches for functional annotation.

Indexed as

Databases, ProteinModels, ChemicalAmino Acid SequenceBinding SitesCatalysisComputer SimulationEnzyme ActivationEnzymesMolecular Sequence DataProtein BindingSequence Analysis, ProteinStructure-Activity RelationshipEnzymes

Identifiers

PMID20300652
PMCPMC2837397
OpenAlexW2078880021

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.