Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23236358›Full record

ArticlePloS one2012

Secondary structure, a missing component of sequence-based minimotif definitions.

David P Sargeant, Michael R Gryk, Mark W Maciejewski, Vishal Thapar, Vamsi Kundeti, Sanguthevar Rajasekaran, Pedro Romero, Keith Dunker, Shun-Cheng Li, Tomonori Kaneko and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Enzymatic carbon-fluorine bond cleavage by human gut microbes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. The carboxy-terminus, a key regulator of protein function.Critical reviews in biochemistry and molecular biology · 2019
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

11 authors.

David P SargeantSchool of Life Sciences, University of Nevada Las Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA.
Michael R Gryk
Mark W Maciejewski
Vishal Thapar
Vamsi Kundeti
Sanguthevar Rajasekaran
Pedro Romero
Keith Dunker
Shun-Cheng Li
Tomonori Kaneko
Martin R Schiller

Funding

Efficient Algorithms for Motif SearchR01LM010101 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT STORRS · PI RAJASEKARAN, SANGUTHEVAR · 2010 to 2013
$1.4M
Building motif lexiconsR01GM079689 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA LAS VEGAS · PI SCHILLER, MARTIN R · 2007 to 2010
$1.1M
NIGMS NIH HHS GM079689NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM079689NLM NIH HHS LM010101NLM NIH HHS R01 LM010101
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Minimotifs are short contiguous segments of proteins that have a known biological function. The hundreds of thousands of minimotifs discovered thus far are an important part of the theoretical understanding of the specificity of protein-protein interactions, posttranslational modifications, and signal transduction that occur in cells. However, a longstanding problem is that the different abstractions of the sequence definitions do not accurately capture the specificity, despite decades of effort by many labs. We present evidence that structure is an essential component of minimotif specificity, yet is not used in minimotif definitions. Our analysis of several known minimotifs as case studies, analysis of occurrences of minimotifs in structured and disordered regions of proteins, and review of the literature support a new model for minimotif definitions that includes sequence, structure, and function.

Indexed as

Amino Acid MotifsProtein Structure, SecondaryDatabases, ProteinHumansProteinsSequence Analysis, ProteinProteins

Identifiers

PMID23236358
PMCPMC3517595

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.