ArticleBMC bioinformatics2013
Protein structure based prediction of catalytic residues.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- xProtCAS: A Toolkit for Extracting Conserved Accessible Surfaces from Protein Structures.Biomolecules · 2023Article
- Saturation Mutagenesis of the Transmembrane Region of HokC inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Network analysis of dynamically important residues in protein structures mediating ligand-binding conformational changes.European biophysics journal : EBJ · 2019Article
- The choice of sequence homologs included in multiple sequence alignments has a dramatic impact on evolutionary conservation analysis.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2019Article
- Identifying functionally informative evolutionary sequence profiles.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2018Article
- CSmetaPred: a consensus method for prediction of catalytic residues.BMC bioinformatics · 2017Article
- Systematic Identification of Machine-Learning Models Aimed to Classify Critical Residues for Protein Function from Protein Structure.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017Article
- Estimating the success of enzyme bioprospecting through metagenomics: current status and future trends.Microbial biotechnology · 2016Review
- Cutoff lensing: predicting catalytic sites in enzymes.Scientific reports · 2015Article
- Article
- Basis for substrate recognition and distinction by matrix metalloproteinases.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014Article
- Trends in structural coverage of the protein universe and the impact of the Protein Structure Initiative.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014Article
- EXIA2: web server of accurate and rapid protein catalytic residue prediction.BioMed research international · 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
backgroundWorldwide structural genomics projects continue to release new protein structures at an unprecedented pace, so far nearly 6000, but only about 60% of these proteins have any sort of functional annotation.
resultsWe explored a range of features that can be used for the prediction of functional residues given a known three-dimensional structure. These features include various centrality measures of nodes in graphs of interacting residues: closeness, betweenness and page-rank centrality. We also analyzed the distance of functional amino acids to the general center of mass (GCM) of the structure, relative solvent accessibility (RSA), and the use of relative entropy as a measure of sequence conservation. From the selected features, neural networks were trained to identify catalytic residues. We found that using distance to the GCM together with amino acid type provide a good discriminant function, when combined independently with sequence conservation. Using an independent test set of 29 annotated protein structures, the method returned 411 of the initial 9262 residues as the most likely to be involved in function. The output 411 residues contain 70 of the annotated 111 catalytic residues. This represents an approximately 14-fold enrichment of catalytic residues on the entire input set (corresponding to a sensitivity of 63% and a precision of 17%), a performance competitive with that of other state-of-the-art methods.
conclusionsWe found that several of the graph based measures utilize the same underlying feature of protein structures, which can be simply and more effectively captured with the distance to GCM definition. This also has the added the advantage of simplicity and easy implementation. Meanwhile sequence conservation remains by far the most influential feature in identifying functional residues. We also found that due the rapid changes in size and composition of sequence databases, conservation calculations must be recalibrated for specific reference databases.
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.