ArticleJournal of structural and functional genomics2011
Accuracy of functional surfaces on comparatively modeled protein structures.
Article in Journal of structural and functional genomics, 2011. 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.
- Repurposing Anti-Dengue Compounds against Monkeypox Virus Targeting Core Cysteine Protease.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Accurate protein function prediction via graph attention networks with predicted structure information.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2022Article
- CASTp 3.0: computed atlas of surface topography of proteins.Nucleic acids research · 2018Article
- Inhibition of protein interactions: co-crystalized protein-protein interfaces are nearly as good as holo proteins in rigid-body ligand docking.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2018Article
- Modeling complexes of modeled proteins.Proteins · 2017Article
- Low-resolution structural modeling of protein interactome.Current opinion in structural biology · 2013Review
- Modeling regionalized volumetric differences in protein-ligand binding cavities.Proteome science · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Identification and characterization of protein functional surfaces are important for predicting protein function, understanding enzyme mechanism, and docking small compounds to proteins. As the rapid speed of accumulation of protein sequence information far exceeds that of structures, constructing accurate models of protein functional surfaces and identify their key elements become increasingly important. A promising approach is to build comparative models from sequences using known structural templates such as those obtained from structural genome projects. Here we assess how well this approach works in modeling binding surfaces. By systematically building three-dimensional comparative models of proteins using MODELLER: , we determine how well functional surfaces can be accurately reproduced. We use an alpha shape based pocket algorithm to compute all pockets on the modeled structures, and conduct a large-scale computation of similarity measurements (pocket RMSD and fraction of functional atoms captured) for 26,590 modeled enzyme protein structures. Overall, we find that when the sequence fragment of the binding surfaces has more than 45% identity to that of the template protein, the modeled surfaces have on average an RMSD of 0.5 Å, and contain 48% or more of the binding surface atoms, with nearly all of the important atoms in the signatures of binding pockets captured.
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.