ArticlePloS one2016
Characterising Complex Enzyme Reaction Data.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fast structural search for classification of gut bacterial mucin O-glycan degrading enzymes.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- MITE: the Minimum Information about a Tailoring Enzyme database for capturing specialized metabolite biosynthesis.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- AI-Driven Enzyme Engineering: Emerging Models and Next-Generation Biotechnological Applications.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Computational approaches to enzymatic reaction assignment: a review of methods, validations, and future directions.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Review
- Architect: A tool for aiding the reconstruction of high-quality metabolic models through improved enzyme annotation.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Carbohydrate Metabolism in Bacteria: Alternative Specificities in ADP-Glucose Pyrophosphorylases Open Novel Metabolic Scenarios and Biotechnological Tools.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Machine learning for enzyme engineering, selection and design.Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS · 2021Review
- ASaiM-MT: a validated and optimized ASaiM workflow for metatranscriptomics analysis within Galaxy framework.F1000Research · 2021Article
- SimCAL: a flexible tool to compute biochemical reaction similarity.BMC bioinformatics · 2018Article
- Allosteric Control of Substrate Specificity of theFrontiers in chemistry · 2017Article
- Internet Databases of the Properties, Enzymatic Reactions, and Metabolism of Small Molecules-Search Options and Applications in Food Science.International journal of molecular sciences · 2016Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The relationship between enzyme-catalysed reactions and the Enzyme Commission (EC) number, the widely accepted classification scheme used to characterise enzyme activity, is complex and with the rapid increase in our knowledge of the reactions catalysed by enzymes needs revisiting. We present a manual and computational analysis to investigate this complexity and found that almost one-third of all known EC numbers are linked to more than one reaction in the secondary reaction databases (e.g., KEGG). Although this complexity is often resolved by defining generic, alternative and partial reactions, we have also found individual EC numbers with more than one reaction catalysing different types of bond changes. This analysis adds a new dimension to our understanding of enzyme function and might be useful for the accurate annotation of the function of enzymes and to study the changes in enzyme function during evolution.
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.