ArticleProtein science : a publication of the Protein Society2013
Exhaustive comparison and classification of ligand-binding surfaces in proteins.
Article in Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Protein Data Bank Japan: Celebrating our 20th anniversary during a global pandemic as the Asian hub of three dimensional macromolecular structural data.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2022Article
- In Silico Structural Modeling and Analysis of Elongation Factor-1 Alpha and Elongation Factor-like Protein.ACS omega · 2019Article
- LIBRA-WA: a web application for ligand binding site detection and protein function recognition.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2018Article
- Protein Data Bank Japan (PDBj): updated user interfaces, resource description framework, analysis tools for large structures.Nucleic acids research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many proteins function by interacting with other small molecules (ligands). Identification of ligand-binding sites (LBS) in proteins can therefore help to infer their molecular functions. A comprehensive comparison among local structures of LBSs was previously performed, in order to understand their relationships and to classify their structural motifs. However, similar exhaustive comparison among local surfaces of LBSs (patches) has never been performed, due to computational complexity. To enhance our understanding of LBSs, it is worth performing such comparisons among patches and classifying them based on similarities of their surface configurations and electrostatic potentials. In this study, we first developed a rapid method to compare two patches. We then clustered patches corresponding to the same PDB chemical component identifier for a ligand, and selected a representative patch from each cluster. We subsequently exhaustively as compared the representative patches and clustered them using similarity score, PatSim. Finally, the resultant PatSim scores were compared with similarities of atomic structures of the LBSs and those of the ligand-binding protein sequences and functions. Consequently, we classified the patches into ≈ 2000 well-characterized clusters. We found that about 63% of these clusters are used in identical protein folds, although about 25% of the clusters are conserved in distantly related proteins and even in proteins with cross-fold similarity. Furthermore, we showed that patches with higher PatSim score have potential to be involved in similar biological processes.
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.