Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27327045›Full record

ArticleProtein science : a publication of the Protein Society2016

Landscape of protein-small ligand binding modes.

Kota Kasahara, Kengo Kinoshita

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Kota KasaharaCollege of Life Sciences, Ritsumeikan University, Kusatsu, Shiga, 525-8577, Japan.
Kengo KinoshitaGraduate School of Information Sciences, Tohoku University, Sendai, Miyagi, 980-8597, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Elucidating the mechanisms of specific small-molecule (ligand) recognition by proteins is a long-standing conundrum. While the structures of these molecules, proteins and ligands, have been extensively studied, protein-ligand interactions, or binding modes, have not been comprehensively analyzed. Although methods for assessing similarities of binding site structures have been extensively developed, the methods for the computational treatment of binding modes have not been well established. Here, we developed a computational method for encoding the information about binding modes as graphs, and assessing their similarities. An all-against-all comparison of 20,040 protein-ligand complexes provided the landscape of the protein-ligand binding modes and its relationships with protein- and chemical spaces. While similar proteins in the same SCOP Family tend to bind relatively similar ligands with similar binding modes, the correlation between ligand and binding similarities was not very high (R(2)  = 0.443). We found many pairs with novel relationships, in which two evolutionally distant proteins recognize dissimilar ligands by similar binding modes (757,474 pairs out of 200,790,780 pairs were categorized into this relationship, in our dataset). In addition, there were an abundance of pairs of homologous proteins binding to similar ligands with different binding modes (68,217 pairs). Our results showed that many interesting relationships between protein-ligand complexes are still hidden in the structure database, and our new method for assessing binding mode similarities is effective to find them.

Indexed as

Databases, ProteinLigandsModels, MolecularBinding SitesProtein BindingProteinsLigandsProteinsbinding modesbioinformaticschemoinformaticsdatabasemolecular recognitionprotein-ligand complexes

Identifiers

PMID27327045
PMCPMC5338237

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.