ReviewAdvances in colloid and interface science2014
Comparison between the behavior of different hydrophobic peptides allowing membrane anchoring of proteins.
Review in Advances in colloid and interface science, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- From microbes to molecules: a review of microbial-driven antioxidant peptide generation.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2023Review
- Advances on the Antioxidant Peptides from Nuts: A Narrow Review.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- PB1F2 from Influenza A Virus Regulates the Interaction between Cytochrome C and Cardiolipin.Membranes · 2022Article
- In Silico Selection and Evaluation of Pugnins with Antibacterial and Anticancer Activity Using Skin Transcriptome of Treefrog (Pharmaceutics · 2021Article
- Effect of Aminated Chitosan-Coated FeInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Effect of N- and C-Terminal Amino Acids on the Interfacial Binding Properties of Phospholipase D fromInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2018Article
- Evaluating polymeric biomaterial-environment interfaces by Langmuir monolayer techniques.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Membrane binding of proteins such as short chain dehydrogenase reductases or tail-anchored proteins relies on their N- and/or C-terminal hydrophobic transmembrane segment. In this review, we propose guidelines to characterize such hydrophobic peptide segments using spectroscopic and biophysical measurements. The secondary structure content of the C-terminal peptides of retinol dehydrogenase 8, RGS9-1 anchor protein, lecithin retinol acyl transferase, and of the N-terminal peptide of retinol dehydrogenase 11 has been deduced by prediction tools from their primary sequence as well as by using infrared or circular dichroism analyses. Depending on the solvent and the solubilization method, significant structural differences were observed, often involving α-helices. The helical structure of these peptides was found to be consistent with their presumed membrane binding. Langmuir monolayers have been used as membrane models to study lipid-peptide interactions. The values of maximum insertion pressure obtained for all peptides using a monolayer of 1,2-dioleoyl-sn-glycero-3-phospho-ethanolamine (DOPE) are larger than the estimated lateral pressure of membranes, thus suggesting that they bind membranes. Polarization modulation infrared reflection absorption spectroscopy has been used to determine the structure and orientation of these peptides in the absence and in the presence of a DOPE monolayer. This lipid induced an increase or a decrease in the organization of the peptide secondary structure. Further measurements are necessary using other lipids to better understand the membrane interactions of these peptides.
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.