ArticleProteins2017
Protein social behavior makes a stronger signal for partner identification than surface geometry.
Article in Proteins, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ligand-driven modulation of chaperone-cochaperone networks shapes proteostasis outcomes.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2026Article
- SENSE-PPI reconstructs interactomes within, across, and between species at the genome scale.iScience · 2024Article
- Deep Local Analysis evaluates protein docking conformations with locally oriented cubes.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- From complete cross-docking to partners identification and binding sites predictions.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Article
- Identification and visualization of protein binding regions with the ArDock server.Nucleic acids research · 2018Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cells are interactive living systems where proteins movements, interactions and regulation are substantially free from centralized management. How protein physico-chemical and geometrical properties determine who interact with whom remains far from fully understood. We show that characterizing how a protein behaves with many potential interactors in a complete cross-docking study leads to a sharp identification of its cellular/true/native partner(s). We define a sociability index, or S-index, reflecting whether a protein likes or not to pair with other proteins. Formally, we propose a suitable normalization function that accounts for protein sociability and we combine it with a simple interface-based (ranking) score to discriminate partners from non-interactors. We show that sociability is an important factor and that the normalization permits to reach a much higher discriminative power than shape complementarity docking scores. The social effect is also observed with more sophisticated docking algorithms. Docking conformations are evaluated using experimental binding sites. These latter approximate in the best possible way binding sites predictions, which have reached high accuracy in recent years. This makes our analysis helpful for a global understanding of partner identification and for suggesting discriminating strategies. These results contradict previous findings claiming the partner identification problem being solvable solely with geometrical docking. Proteins 2016; 85:137-154. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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.