Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27566436›Full record

ArticleProteins2016

TMSEG: Novel prediction of transmembrane helices.

Michael Bernhofer, Edda Kloppmann, Jonas Reeb, Burkhard Rost

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proteins, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Inconspicuous Yet Indispensable: The Coronavirus Spike Transmembrane Domain.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Analysis of microbiota-host communication mediated by butyrate in Atlantic salmon.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2023
    Article
  12. A Uniquely Stable Trimeric Model of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Transmembrane Domain.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Computational prediction of secreted proteins in gram-negative bacteria.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2021
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael BernhoferDepartment of Informatics & Center for Bioinformatics & Computational Biology - i12, Technische Universität München (TUM), Boltzmannstr. 3, Garching/Munich, 85748, Germany. Michael.Bernhofer@mytum.de.
Edda KloppmannDepartment of Informatics & Center for Bioinformatics & Computational Biology - i12, Technische Universität München (TUM), Boltzmannstr. 3, Garching/Munich, 85748, Germany.
Jonas ReebDepartment of Informatics & Center for Bioinformatics & Computational Biology - i12, Technische Universität München (TUM), Boltzmannstr. 3, Garching/Munich, 85748, Germany.
Burkhard RostDepartment of Informatics & Center for Bioinformatics & Computational Biology - i12, Technische Universität München (TUM), Boltzmannstr. 3, Garching/Munich, 85748, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0179-8424
New York Structural Biology Center · USTechnical University of Munich · DE

Funding

Structural Genomics on Membrane ProteinsU54GM095315 · NIGMS · NEW YORK STRUCTURAL BIOLOGY CENTER · PI ROST, BURKHARD · 2010 to 2014
$15.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM095315
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transmembrane proteins (TMPs) are important drug targets because they are essential for signaling, regulation, and transport. Despite important breakthroughs, experimental structure determination remains challenging for TMPs. Various methods have bridged the gap by predicting transmembrane helices (TMHs), but room for improvement remains. Here, we present TMSEG, a novel method identifying TMPs and accurately predicting their TMHs and their topology. The method combines machine learning with empirical filters. Testing it on a non-redundant dataset of 41 TMPs and 285 soluble proteins, and applying strict performance measures, TMSEG outperformed the state-of-the-art in our hands. TMSEG correctly distinguished helical TMPs from other proteins with a sensitivity of 98 ± 2% and a false positive rate as low as 3 ± 1%. Individual TMHs were predicted with a precision of 87 ± 3% and recall of 84 ± 3%. Furthermore, in 63 ± 6% of helical TMPs the placement of all TMHs and their inside/outside topology was correctly predicted. There are two main features that distinguish TMSEG from other methods. First, the errors in finding all helical TMPs in an organism are significantly reduced. For example, in human this leads to 200 and 1600 fewer misclassifications compared to the second and third best method available, and 4400 fewer mistakes than by a simple hydrophobicity-based method. Second, TMSEG provides an add-on improvement for any existing method to benefit from. Proteins 2016; 84:1706-1716. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Indexed as

Machine LearningDatabases, ProteinDatasets as TopicHumansHydrophobic and Hydrophilic InteractionsMembrane ProteinsProtein Conformation, alpha-HelicalSensitivity and SpecificityMembrane Proteinsmembrane proteinprotein structure predictiontransmembrane helicestransmembrane helix predictiontransmembrane protein predictionα-helical integral membrane protein

Identifiers

PMID27566436
PMCPMC5073023
OpenAlexW2517405041

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.