Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20871599›Full record

ArticleNature chemical biology2010

Rational assignment of key motifs for function guides in silico enzyme identification.

Matthias Höhne, Sebastian Schätzle, Helge Jochens, Karen Robins, Uwe T Bornscheuer

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature chemical biology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing 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

77 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Tuning of Protein Expression by Promoter Engineering.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Shifting the pH Optima of (International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Matthias HöhneDepartment of Biotechnology and Enzyme Catalysis, Institute of Biochemistry, Greifswald University, Greifswald, Germany.
Sebastian Schätzle
Helge Jochens
Karen Robins
Uwe T Bornscheuer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biocatalysis has emerged as a powerful alternative to traditional chemistry, especially for asymmetric synthesis. One key requirement during process development is the discovery of a biocatalyst with an appropriate enantiopreference and enantioselectivity, which can be achieved, for instance, by protein engineering or screening of metagenome libraries. We have developed an in silico strategy for a sequence-based prediction of substrate specificity and enantiopreference. First, we used rational protein design to predict key amino acid substitutions that indicate the desired activity. Then, we searched protein databases for proteins already carrying these mutations instead of constructing the corresponding mutants in the laboratory. This methodology exploits the fact that naturally evolved proteins have undergone selection over millions of years, which has resulted in highly optimized catalysts. Using this in silico approach, we have discovered 17 (R)-selective amine transaminases, which catalyzed the synthesis of several (R)-amines with excellent optical purity up to >99% enantiomeric excess.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAmino Acid MotifsAmino Acid SequenceBacteriaBiocatalysisComputational BiologyDatabases, ProteinGlutamic AcidKetoglutaric AcidsMolecular Sequence DataPyruvic AcidSequence AlignmentStereoisomerismStructure-Activity RelationshipSubstrate SpecificityTransaminasesGlutamic AcidKetoglutaric AcidsPyruvic AcidTransaminases

Identifiers

PMID20871599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.