Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21614471›Full record

ReviewCellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS2011

Fractal symmetry of protein interior: what have we learned?

Anirban Banerji, Indira Ghosh

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Locating and Navigating Energy Transport Networks in Proteins.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021
    Review
  4. Ras isoforms: signaling specificities in CD40 pathway.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anirban BanerjiBioinformatics Centre, University of Pune, Maharashtra, India. anirbanab@gmail.com
Indira Ghosh
Jawaharlal Nehru University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The application of fractal dimension-based constructs to probe the protein interior dates back to the development of the concept of fractal dimension itself. Numerous approaches have been tried and tested over a course of (almost) 30 years with the aim of elucidating the various facets of symmetry of self-similarity prevalent in the protein interior. In the last 5 years especially, there has been a startling upsurge of research that innovatively stretches the limits of fractal-based studies to present an array of unexpected results on the biophysical properties of protein interior. In this article, we introduce readers to the fundamentals of fractals, reviewing the commonality (and the lack of it) between these approaches before exploring the patterns in the results that they produced. Clustering the approaches in major schools of protein self-similarity studies, we describe the evolution of fractal dimension-based methodologies. The genealogy of approaches (and results) presented here portrays a clear picture of the contemporary state of fractal-based studies in the context of the protein interior. To underline the utility of fractal dimension-based measures further, we have performed a correlation dimension analysis on all of the available non-redundant protein structures, both at the level of an individual protein and at the level of structural domains. In this investigation, we were able to separately quantify the self-similar symmetries in spatial correlation patterns amongst peptide-dipole units, charged amino acids, residues with the π-electron cloud and hydrophobic amino acids. The results revealed that electrostatic environments in the interiors of proteins belonging to 'α/α toroid' (all-α class) and 'PLP-dependent transferase-like' domains (α/β class) are highly conducive. In contrast, the interiors of 'zinc finger design' ('designed proteins') and 'knottins' ('small proteins') were identified as folds with the least conducive electrostatic environments. The fold 'conotoxins' (peptides) could be unambiguously identified as one type with the least stability. The same analyses revealed that peptide-dipoles in the α/β class of proteins, in general, are more correlated to each other than are the peptide-dipoles in proteins belonging to the all-α class. Highly favorable electrostatic milieu in the interiors of TIM-barrel, α/β-hydrolase structures could explain their remarkably conserved (evolutionary) stability from a new light. Finally, we point out certain inherent limitations of fractal constructs before attempting to identify the areas and problems where the implementation of fractal dimension-based constructs can be of paramount help to unearth latent information on protein structural properties.

Indexed as

FractalsKineticsProtein ConformationProteinsStatic ElectricityProteins

Identifiers

PMID21614471
PMCPMC11114926
OpenAlexW2057426691

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.