ArticlePloS one2013
Nanodiscs allow phage display selection for ligands to non-linear epitopes on membrane proteins.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- In Vitro Selection of Antibodies TargetingPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Phage Display Biopanning Strategies for the Selection of Anti-Cell Surface Receptor Antibodies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Therapeutic Nanobodies Targeting Cell Plasma Membrane Transport Proteins: A High-Risk/High-Gain Endeavor.Biomolecules · 2021Review
- Construction of Antibody Phage Libraries and Their Application in Veterinary Immunovirology.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Unidirectional Presentation of Membrane Proteins in Nanoparticle-Supported Liposomes.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2019Article
- Applications and Advances in Bioelectronic Noses for Odour Sensing.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- Nanodiscs in Membrane Biochemistry and Biophysics.Chemical reviews · 2017Review
- Generating Recombinant Antibodies to Membrane Proteins through Phage Display.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2016Review
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this work, we exploited a method that uses polytopic membrane proteins as targets for phage display selections. Membrane proteins represent the largest class of drug targets and drug discovery is mostly based on the identification of ligands binding to target molecules. The screening of a phage display library for ligands against membrane proteins is typically hindered by the requirement of these proteins for a membrane environment, which is necessary to retain correct folding and epitope formation. Especially in proteins with multiple transmembrane domains, epitopes often are non-linear and consist of a combination of loops between transmembrane stretches of the proteins. Here, we have used bacteriorhodopsin (bR) as a model of polytopic membrane protein, assembled into nanoscale phospholipid bilayers, so called nanodiscs, to screen a phage display library for potential ligands. Nanodiscs provide a native-like environment to membrane proteins and thus selection of ligands can take place in a near physiological state. Screening a 12-mer phage display peptide library against bR nanodiscs led to the isolation of phage clones binding specifically to bR. We were further able to identify the binding site of selected phage clones proving that the clones bind to extramembranous, non-linear epitopes of bR. Thus, nanodiscs provide a suitable and general tool that allows screening of a phage display library against membrane proteins in a near native environment.
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.