ReviewMolecular & cellular proteomics : MCP2013
Popular computational methods to assess multiprotein complexes derived from label-free affinity purification and mass spectrometry (AP-MS) experiments.
Review in Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing Proximity Proteomics on the EvoSep-timsTOF LC-MS System.Proteomics · 2025Article
- Emergence of power law distributions in protein-protein interaction networks through study bias.eLife · 2024Article
- Bidirectional linkage of DNA barcodes for the multiplexed mapping of higher-order protein interactions in cells.Nature biomedical engineering · 2024Article
- Multiparameter screen optimizes immunoprecipitation.BioTechniques · 2024Article
- Trans-Proteomic Pipeline: Robust Mass Spectrometry-Based Proteomics Data Analysis Suite.Journal of proteome research · 2023Article
- Recent advances in proteomics and metabolomics in plants.Molecular horticulture · 2022Review
- Mapping the plant proteome: tools for surveying coordinating pathways.Emerging topics in life sciences · 2021Review
- Mapping the SARS-CoV-2-Host Protein-Protein Interactome by Affinity Purification Mass Spectrometry and Proximity-Dependent Biotin Labeling: A Rational and Straightforward Route to Discover Host-Directed Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Therapeutics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Prediction of Protein-Protein Interactions inFrontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- Affinity proteomic dissection of the human nuclear cap-binding complex interactome.Nucleic acids research · 2020Article
- Affinity Proteomic Analysis of the Human Exosome and Its Cofactor Complexes.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2020Article
- Proteomic Applications in Antimicrobial Resistance and Clinical Microbiology Studies.Infection and drug resistance · 2020Review
- Identification of RNase-sensitive LINE-1 Ribonucleoprotein Interactions by Differential Affinity Immobilization.Bio-protocol · 2019Article
- Experimental Analysis of Viral-Host Interactions.Frontiers in physiology · 2019Review
- Co-complex protein membership evaluation using Maximum Entropy on GO ontology and InterPro annotation.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2018Article
- Global landscape of cell envelope protein complexes in Escherichia coli.Nature biotechnology · 2018Article
- A two-step framework for inferring direct protein-protein interaction network from AP-MS data.BMC systems biology · 2017Article
- Proteomics and integrative omic approaches for understanding host-pathogen interactions and infectious diseases.Molecular systems biology · 2017Review
- Protein Complex Affinity Capture from Cryomilled Mammalian Cells.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2016Article
- Differential connectivity of splicing activators and repressors to the human spliceosome.Genome biology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Advances in sensitivity, resolution, mass accuracy, and throughput have considerably increased the number of protein identifications made via mass spectrometry. Despite these advances, state-of-the-art experimental methods for the study of protein-protein interactions yield more candidate interactions than may be expected biologically owing to biases and limitations in the experimental methodology. In silico methods, which distinguish between true and false interactions, have been developed and applied successfully to reduce the number of false positive results yielded by physical interaction assays. Such methods may be grouped according to: (1) the type of data used: methods based on experiment-specific measurements (e.g., spectral counts or identification scores) versus methods that extract knowledge encoded in external annotations (e.g., public interaction and functional categorisation databases); (2) the type of algorithm applied: the statistical description and estimation of physical protein properties versus predictive supervised machine learning or text-mining algorithms; (3) the type of protein relation evaluated: direct (binary) interaction of two proteins in a cocomplex versus probability of any functional relationship between two proteins (e.g., co-occurrence in a pathway, sub cellular compartment); and (4) initial motivation: elucidation of experimental data by evaluation versus prediction of novel protein-protein interaction, to be experimentally validated a posteriori. This work reviews several popular computational scoring methods and software platforms for protein-protein interactions evaluation according to their methodology, comparative strengths and weaknesses, data representation, accessibility, and availability. The scoring methods and platforms described include: CompPASS, SAINT, Decontaminator, MINT, IntAct, STRING, and FunCoup. References to related work are provided throughout in order to provide a concise but thorough introduction to a rapidly growing interdisciplinary field of investigation.
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.