Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26740739›Full record

ArticleEvolutionary bioinformatics online2015

Why do Sequence Signatures Predict Enzyme Mechanism? Homology versus Chemistry.

Kirsten E Beattie, Luna De Ferrari, John B O Mitchell

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evolutionary bioinformatics online, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kirsten E BeattieBiomedical Sciences Research Complex and EaStCHEM School of Chemistry, Purdie Building, University of St Andrews, North Haugh, St Andrews, Scotland, UK.
Luna De FerrariBiomedical Sciences Research Complex and EaStCHEM School of Chemistry, Purdie Building, University of St Andrews, North Haugh, St Andrews, Scotland, UK.
John B O MitchellBiomedical Sciences Research Complex and EaStCHEM School of Chemistry, Purdie Building, University of St Andrews, North Haugh, St Andrews, Scotland, UK.
University of St Andrews · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

First, we identify InterPro sequence signatures representing evolutionary relatedness and, second, signatures identifying specific chemical machinery. Thus, we predict the chemical mechanisms of enzyme-catalyzed reactions from catalytic and non-catalytic subsets of InterPro signatures. We first scanned our 249 sequences using InterProScan and then used the MACiE database to identify those amino acid residues that are important for catalysis. The sequences were mutated in silico to replace these catalytic residues with glycine and then again scanned using InterProScan. Those signature matches from the original scan that disappeared on mutation were called catalytic. Mechanism was predicted using all signatures, only the 78 "catalytic" signatures, or only the 519 "non-catalytic" signatures. The non-catalytic signatures gave indistinguishable results from those for the whole feature set, with precision of 0.991 and sensitivity of 0.970. The catalytic signatures alone gave less impressive predictivity, with precision and sensitivity of 0.791 and 0.735, respectively. These results show that our successful prediction of enzyme mechanism is mostly by homology rather than by identifying catalytic machinery.

Indexed as

active siteenzyme catalysisevolutionhomologyInterProreaction mechanismsequence signatures

Identifiers

PMID26740739
PMCPMC4696837
OpenAlexW2204227908

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.