ArticlePloS one2013
Predicting binding within disordered protein regions to structurally characterised peptide-binding domains.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting molecular recognition features in protein sequences with MoRFchibi 2.0.BMC bioinformatics · 2026Article
- SLiMs prediction method based on enhanced attention mechanism and feature fusion.Bioinformatics advances · 2026Article
- Computational Prediction of Linear Interacting Peptides.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Advanced computational approaches to understand protein aggregation.Biophysics reviews · 2024Review
- Data-Driven Models for Predicting Intrinsically Disordered Protein Polymer Physics Directly from Composition or Sequence.Molecular systems design & engineering · 2023Article
- Computational Prediction of Protein Intrinsically Disordered Region Related Interactions and Functions.Genes · 2023Review
- Computational prediction of disordered binding regions.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2023Review
- Assessing the clinical utility of protein structural analysis in genomic variant classification: experiences from a diagnostic laboratory.Genome medicine · 2022Article
- Investigating the disordered regions (MoRFs, SLiMs and LCRs) and functions of mimicry proteins/peptides in silico.PloS one · 2022Article
- Prediction of protein-protein interaction sites in intrinsically disordered proteins.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2022Review
- Prediction of polyproline II secondary structure propensity in proteins.Royal Society open science · 2020Article
- New technologies to analyse protein function: an intrinsic disorder perspective.F1000Research · 2020Review
- Computational Prediction of MoRFs, Short Disorder-to-order Transitioning Protein Binding Regions.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2019Review
- Decision-Tree Based Meta-Strategy Improved Accuracy of Disorder Prediction and Identified Novel Disordered Residues Inside Binding Motifs.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018Article
- Structural changes in DNA-binding proteins on complexation.Nucleic acids research · 2018Article
- Comprehensive review of methods for prediction of intrinsic disorder and its molecular functions.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2017Review
- Review
- DFLpred: High-throughput prediction of disordered flexible linker regions in protein sequences.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2016Article
- ELM 2016--data update and new functionality of the eukaryotic linear motif resource.Nucleic acids research · 2016Article
- High-throughput prediction of RNA, DNA and protein binding regions mediated by intrinsic disorder.Nucleic acids research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Disordered regions of proteins often bind to structured domains, mediating interactions within and between proteins. However, it is difficult to identify a priori the short disordered regions involved in binding. We set out to determine if docking such peptide regions to peptide binding domains would assist in these predictions.We assembled a redundancy reduced dataset of SLiM (Short Linear Motif) containing proteins from the ELM database. We selected 84 sequences which had an associated PDB structures showing the SLiM bound to a protein receptor, where the SLiM was found within a 50 residue region of the protein sequence which was predicted to be disordered. First, we investigated the Vina docking scores of overlapping tripeptides from the 50 residue SLiM containing disordered regions of the protein sequence to the corresponding PDB domain. We found only weak discrimination of docking scores between peptides involved in binding and adjacent non-binding peptides in this context (AUC 0.58).Next, we trained a bidirectional recurrent neural network (BRNN) using as input the protein sequence, predicted secondary structure, Vina docking score and predicted disorder score. The results were very promising (AUC 0.72) showing that multiple sources of information can be combined to produce results which are clearly superior to any single source.We conclude that the Vina docking score alone has only modest power to define the location of a peptide within a larger protein region known to contain it. However, combining this information with other knowledge (using machine learning methods) clearly improves the identification of peptide binding regions within a protein sequence. This approach combining docking with machine learning is primarily a predictor of binding to peptide-binding sites, and is not intended as a predictor of specificity of binding to particular receptors.
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.