ReviewBioengineered2017
Synthetic biology of modular proteins.
Review in Bioengineered, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Open-endedness in synthetic biology: A route to continual innovation for biological design.Science advances · 2024Review
- Late-stage diversification of bacterial natural products through biocatalysis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
- Improved RAD51 binders through motif shuffling based on the modularity of BRC repeats.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
- Multifunctional cellulases are potent, versatile tools for a renewable bioeconomy.Current opinion in biotechnology · 2021Review
- Site directed mutagenesis as a precision tool to enable synthetic biology with engineered modular polyketide synthases.Synthetic and systems biotechnology · 2020Review
- A VersaTile-driven platform for rapid hit-to-lead development of engineered lysins.Science advances · 2020Article
- Approaches to optimize therapeutic bacteriophage and bacteriophage-derived products to combat bacterial infections.Virus genes · 2020Review
- Acyltransferases as Tools for Polyketide Synthase Engineering.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The evolution of natural modular proteins and domain swapping by protein engineers have shown the disruptive potential of non-homologous recombination to create proteins with novel functions or traits. Bacteriophage endolysins, cellulosomes and polyketide synthases are 3 examples of natural modular proteins with each module having a dedicated function. These modular architectures have been created by extensive duplication, shuffling of domains and insertion/deletion of new domains. Protein engineers mimic these natural processes in vitro to create chimeras with altered properties or novel functions by swapping modules between different parental genes. Most domain swapping efforts are realized with traditional restriction and ligation techniques, which become particularly restrictive when either a large number of variants, or variants of proteins with multiple domains have to be constructed. Recent advances in homology-independent shuffling techniques increasingly address this need, but to realize the full potential of the synthetic biology of modular proteins a complete homology-independent method for both rational and random shuffling of modules from an unlimited number of parental genes is still needed.
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.