Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26228684›Full record

ArticleBiology direct2015

De-DUFing the DUFs: Deciphering distant evolutionary relationships of Domains of Unknown Function using sensitive homology detection methods.

Richa Mudgal, Sankaran Sandhya, Nagasuma Chandra, Narayanaswamy Srinivasan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology direct, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Identification of theBiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Genome-Wide Identification and Transcriptional Analysis of ArabidopsisInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Richa MudgalIISc Mathematics Initiative, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, 560 012, India. rmudgal@mbu.iisc.ernet.in.
Sankaran SandhyaMolecular Biophysics Unit, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, 560 012, India. sandhya@mbu.iisc.ernet.in.
Nagasuma ChandraDepartment of Biochemistry, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, 560 012, India. nchandra@biochem.iisc.ernet.in.
Narayanaswamy SrinivasanMolecular Biophysics Unit, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, 560 012, India. ns@mbu.iisc.ernet.in.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the post-genomic era where sequences are being determined at a rapid rate, we are highly reliant on computational methods for their tentative biochemical characterization. The Pfam database currently contains 3,786 families corresponding to "Domains of Unknown Function" (DUF) or "Uncharacterized Protein Family" (UPF), of which 3,087 families have no reported three-dimensional structure, constituting almost one-fourth of the known protein families in search for both structure and function.

resultsWe applied a 'computational structural genomics' approach using five state-of-the-art remote similarity detection methods to detect the relationship between uncharacterized DUFs and domain families of known structures. The association with a structural domain family could serve as a start point in elucidating the function of a DUF. Amongst these five methods, searches in SCOP-NrichD database have been applied for the first time. Predictions were classified into high, medium and low- confidence based on the consensus of results from various approaches and also annotated with enzyme and Gene ontology terms. 614 uncharacterized DUFs could be associated with a known structural domain, of which high confidence predictions, involving at least four methods, were made for 54 families. These structure-function relationships for the 614 DUF families can be accessed on-line at http://proline.biochem.iisc.ernet.in/RHD_DUFS/ . For potential enzymes in this set, we assessed their compatibility with the associated fold and performed detailed structural and functional annotation by examining alignments and extent of conservation of functional residues. Detailed discussion is provided for interesting assignments for DUF3050, DUF1636, DUF1572, DUF2092 and DUF659.

conclusionsThis study provides insights into the structure and potential function for nearly 20 % of the DUFs. Use of different computational approaches enables us to reliably recognize distant relationships, especially when they converge to a common assignment because the methods are often complementary. We observe that while pointers to the structural domain can offer the right clues to the function of a protein, recognition of its precise functional role is still 'non-trivial' with many DUF domains conserving only some of the critical residues. It is not clear whether these are functional vestiges or instances involving alternate substrates and interacting partners.

Indexed as

Databases, ProteinEvolution, MolecularProtein Structure, TertiarySequence Homology, Amino AcidComputational BiologyGenomicsMolecular Sequence Annotation

Identifiers

PMID26228684
PMCPMC4520260

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.