ReviewThe Journal of biological chemistry2010
Specificity in computational protein design.
Review in The Journal of biological chemistry, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in ligand-specific biosensing for structurally similar molecules.Cell systems · 2023Review
- Recent advances in automated protein design and its future challenges.Expert opinion on drug discovery · 2018Review
- A "fuzzy"-logic language for encoding multiple physical traits in biomolecules.Journal of molecular biology · 2014Article
- Motif-directed redesign of enzyme specificity.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2014Article
- Protein-protein interface detection using the energy centrality relationship (ECR) characteristic of proteins.PloS one · 2014Article
- BetaSearch: a new method for querying β-residue motifs.BMC research notes · 2012Article
- Computational approaches for rational design of proteins with novel functionalities.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
A long-standing goal of computational protein design is to create proteins similar to those found in Nature. One motivation is to harness the exquisite functional capabilities of proteins for our own purposes. The extent of similarity between designed and natural proteins also reports on how faithfully our models represent the selective pressures that determine protein sequences. As the field of protein design shifts emphasis from reproducing native-like protein structure to function, it has become important that these models treat the notion of specificity in molecular interactions. Although specificity may, in some cases, be achieved by optimization of a desired protein in isolation, methods have been developed to address directly the desire for proteins that exhibit specific functions and interactions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.