ArticleBMC bioinformatics2015
Comparison of phosphorylation patterns across eukaryotes by discriminative N-gram analysis.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evolution of protein kinase substrate recognition at the active site.PLoS biology · 2019Article
- Exact p-values for pairwise comparison of Friedman rank sums, with application to comparing classifiers.BMC bioinformatics · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHow protein phosphorylation relates to kingdom/phylum divergence is largely unknown and the amino acid residues surrounding the phosphorylation site have profound importance on protein kinase-substrate interactions. Standard motif analysis is not adequate for large scale comparative analysis because each phophopeptide is assigned to a unique motif and perform poorly with the unbalanced nature of the input datasets.
resultsFirst the discriminative n-grams of five species from five different kingdom/phyla were identified. A signature with 5540 discriminative n-grams that could be found in other species from the same kingdoms/phyla was created. Using a test data set, the ability of the signature to classify species in their corresponding kingdom/phylum was confirmed using classification methods. Lastly, ortholog proteins among proteins with n-grams were identified in order to determine to what degree was the identity of the detected n-grams a property of phosphosites rather than a consequence of species-specific or kingdom/phylum-specific protein inventory. The motifs were grouped in clusters of equal physico-chemical nature and their distribution was similar between species in the same kingdom/phylum while clear differences were found among species of different kingdom/phylum. For example, the animal-specific top discriminative n-grams contained many basic amino acids and the plant-specific motifs were mainly acidic. Secondary structure prediction methods show that the discriminative n-grams in the majority of the cases lack from a regular secondary structure as on average they had 88% of random coil compared to 66% found in the phosphoproteins they were derived from.
conclusionsThe discriminative n-grams were able to classify organisms in their corresponding kingdom/phylum, they show different patterns among species of different kingdom/phylum and these regions can contribute to evolutionary divergence as they are in disordered regions that can evolve rapidly. The differences found possibly reflect group-specific differences in the kinomes of the different groups of species.
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.