ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2012
Developing a high-quality scoring function for membrane protein structures based on specific inter-residue interactions.
Article in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2012. 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.
- Challenges of Protein-Protein Docking of the Membrane Proteins.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Current Advances in Studying Clinically Relevant Transporters of the Solute Carrier (SLC) Family by Connecting Computational Modeling and Data Science.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2019Review
- A Membrane Burial Potential with H-Bonds and Applications to Curved Membranes and Fast Simulations.Biophysical journal · 2018Article
- TMFoldRec: a statistical potential-based transmembrane protein fold recognition tool.BMC bioinformatics · 2015Article
- Improving homology modeling of G-protein coupled receptors through multiple-template derived conserved inter-residue interactions.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2015Article
- Computational modeling of membrane proteins.Proteins · 2015Review
- Assessing the local structural quality of transmembrane protein models using statistical potentials (QMEANBrane).Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2014Article
- Structural and functional analysis of a platelet-activating lysophosphatidylcholine of Trypanosoma cruzi.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Membrane proteins are of particular biological and pharmaceutical importance, and computational modeling and structure prediction approaches play an important role in studies of membrane proteins. Developing an accurate model quality assessment program is of significance to the structure prediction of membrane proteins. Few such programs are proposed that can be applied to a broad range of membrane protein classes and perform with high accuracy. We developed a new model scoring function Interaction-based Quality assessment (IQ), based on the analysis of four types of inter-residue interactions within the transmembrane domains of helical membrane proteins. This function was tested using three high-quality model sets: all 206 models of GPCR Dock 2008, all 284 models of GPCR Dock 2010, and all 92 helical membrane protein models of the HOMEP set. For all three sets, the scoring function can select the native structures among all of the models with the success rates of 93, 85, and 100% respectively. For comparison, these three model sets were also adopted for a recently published model assessment program for membrane protein structures, ProQM, which gave the success rates of 85, 79, and 92% separately. These results suggested that IQ outperforms ProQM when only the transmembrane regions of the models are considered. This scoring function should be useful for the computational modeling of membrane proteins.
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.