ArticleEXCLI journal2012
New insights regarding protein folding as learned from beta-sheets.
Article in EXCLI journal, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The folding of denatured proteins into their native conformations is called Anfinsen's dogma, and is the rationale for predicting protein structures based on primary sequences. Through the last 40 years of study, all available algorithms which either predict 3D or 2D protein structures, or predict the rate of protein folding based on the amino acid sequence alone, are limited in accuracy (80 %). This fact has led some researchers to look for the lost information, from mRNA to protein sequences, and it encourages us to rethink the rationale of Anfinsen's dogma. In this study, we focus on the relationship between the strand and its partners. We find two rules based on a non-redundant dataset taken from the PDB database. We refer to these two rules as the "first coming first pairing" rule and the "loveless" rule. The first coming first pairing rule indicates that a given strand prefers to pair with the next strand, if the connected region is flexible enough. The loveless rule means that the affinities between a given strand and another strand are comparable to the affinity between the given strand and its partner. Of course, the affinities between the given strand and a helix/coil peptide are significantly less than the affinity between the given strand and its partner. These two rules suggest that in protein folding, we have folding taking place during translation, and suggest also that a denatured protein is not the same as its primary sequence. Rechecking the original Anfinsen experiments, we find that the method used to denature protein in the experiment simply breaks the disulfide bonds, while the helices and sheets remain intact. In other words, denatured proteins still retain all helices and beta sheets, while the primary sequence does not. Although further verification via biological experiments is needed, our results as shown in this study may reveal a new insight for studying protein folding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27540347PMC4983712What 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.