ArticleMolecular & cellular proteomics : MCP2011
Inferring physical protein contacts from large-scale purification data of protein complexes.
Article in Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- WeSA: a web server for improving analysis of affinity proteomics data.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- A two-step framework for inferring direct protein-protein interaction network from AP-MS data.BMC systems biology · 2017Article
- Identifying binary protein-protein interactions from affinity purification mass spectrometry data.BMC genomics · 2015Article
- Prediction of protein-protein interactions with clustered amino acids and weighted sparse representation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2015Article
- Signaling hypergraphs.Trends in biotechnology · 2014Article
- Studying protein complexes by the yeast two-hybrid system.Methods (San Diego, Calif.) · 2012Article
- Inferring high-confidence human protein-protein interactions.BMC bioinformatics · 2012Article
- Reverse engineering molecular hypergraphs.IEEE/ACM transactions on computational biology and bioinformaticsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent large-scale data sets of protein complex purifications have provided unprecedented insights into the organization of cellular protein complexes. Several computational methods have been developed to detect co-complexed proteins in these data sets. Their common aim is the identification of biologically relevant protein complexes. However, much less is known about the network of direct physical protein contacts within the detected protein complexes. Therefore, our work investigates whether direct physical contacts can be computationally derived by combining raw data of large-scale protein complex purifications. We assess four established scoring schemes and introduce a new scoring approach that is specifically devised to infer direct physical protein contacts from protein complex purifications. The physical contacts identified by the five methods are comprehensively benchmarked against different reference sets that provide evidence for true physical contacts. Our results show that raw purification data can indeed be exploited to determine high-confidence physical protein contacts within protein complexes. In particular, our new method outperforms competing approaches at discovering physical contacts involving proteins that have been screened multiple times in purification experiments. It also excels in the analysis of recent protein purification screens of molecular chaperones and protein kinases. In contrast to previous findings, we observe that physical contacts inferred from purification experiments of protein complexes can be qualitatively comparable to binary protein interactions measured by experimental high-throughput assays such as yeast two-hybrid. This suggests that computationally derived physical contacts might complement binary protein interaction assays and guide large-scale interactome mapping projects by prioritizing putative physical contacts for further experimental screens.
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.