Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23140471›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2012

Effective inter-residue contact definitions for accurate protein fold recognition.

Chao Yuan, Hao Chen, Daisuke Kihara

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. AlphaFold model quality self-assessment improvement via deep graph learning.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Contact-Map-Driven Exploration of Heterogeneous Protein-Folding Paths.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2024
    Article
  13. Structural insights into the interaction of three Y-shaped ligands with PI3Kα.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Specific attributes of the VFrontiers in immunology · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Chao YuanDepartment of Biological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.
Hao Chen
Daisuke Kihara

Funding

Surface Shape Based Screening of Large Protein DatabasesR01GM075004 · NIGMS · PURDUE UNIVERSITY WEST LAFAYETTE · PI KIHARA, DAISUKE · 2005 to 2009
$1.5M
Identification of protein-metabolite interactome.R01GM097528 · NIGMS · PURDUE UNIVERSITY · PI KIHARA, DAISUKE · 2011 to 2014
$1.1M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01GM075004NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM097528NIGMS NIH HHS R01GM097528
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEffective encoding of residue contact information is crucial for protein structure prediction since it has a unique role to capture long-range residue interactions compared to other commonly used scoring terms. The residue contact information can be incorporated in structure prediction in several different ways: It can be incorporated as statistical potentials or it can be also used as constraints in ab initio structure prediction. To seek the most effective definition of residue contacts for template-based protein structure prediction, we evaluated 45 different contact definitions, varying bases of contacts and distance cutoffs, in terms of their ability to identify proteins of the same fold.

resultsWe found that overall the residue contact pattern can distinguish protein folds best when contacts are defined for residue pairs whose Cβ atoms are at 7.0 Å or closer to each other. Lower fold recognition accuracy was observed when inaccurate threading alignments were used to identify common residue contacts between protein pairs. In the case of threading, alignment accuracy strongly influences the fraction of common contacts identified among proteins of the same fold, which eventually affects the fold recognition accuracy. The largest deterioration of the fold recognition was observed for β-class proteins when the threading methods were used because the average alignment accuracy was worst for this fold class. When results of fold recognition were examined for individual proteins, we found that the effective contact definition depends on the fold of the proteins. A larger distance cutoff is often advantageous for capturing spatial arrangement of the secondary structures which are not physically in contact. For capturing contacts between neighboring β strands, considering the distance between Cα atoms is better than the Cβ-based distance because the side-chain of interacting residues on β strands sometimes point to opposite directions.

conclusionResidue contacts defined by Cβ-Cβ distance of 7.0 Å work best overall among tested to identify proteins of the same fold. We also found that effective contact definitions differ from fold to fold, suggesting that using different residue contact definition specific for each template will lead to improvement of the performance of threading.

Indexed as

Protein FoldingSoftwareModels, MolecularProtein ConformationProteinsProtein Structure, SecondarySequence Analysis, ProteinProteins

Identifiers

PMID23140471
PMCPMC3534397

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.