Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28137570›Full record

ArticleMethods in enzymology2017

A Comparison of Two-Hybrid Approaches for Detecting Protein-Protein Interactions.

J Mehla, J H Caufield, N Sakhawalkar, P Uetz

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Methods in enzymology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Direct Quantification of Protein-Protein Interactions in Living Bacterial Cells.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Yeast Two-Hybrid System for Mapping Novel Dengue Protein Interactions.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Unraveling Protein Interactions between the Temperate Virus Bam35 and ItsInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

J MehlaCenter for the Study of Biological Complexity, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States. Electronic address: jitender@vcu.edu.
J H CaufieldCenter for the Study of Biological Complexity, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States.
N SakhawalkarCenter for the Study of Biological Complexity, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States.
P UetzCenter for the Study of Biological Complexity, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States. Electronic address: peter@uetz.us.

Funding

The Transporter Classification Database (TCDB)R01GM077402 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI SAIER, MILTON H. · 2006 to 2021
$4.7M
Integrative functional mapping of the Escherichia coli membrane interactomeR01GM109895 · NIGMS · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI SAIER, MILTON H., UETZ, PETER HANS · 2014 to 2017
$1.1M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM077402NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM109895
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two-hybrid systems are one of the most popular, preferred, cost effective, and scalable in vivo genetic approaches for screening protein-protein interactions. A number of variants of yeast and bacterial two-hybrid systems exist, rendering them ideal for modern, flexible proteomics-driven studies. For mapping protein interactions at genome scales (that is, constructing an interactome), the yeast two-hybrid system has been extensively tested and is preferred over bacterial two-hybrid systems, given that users have created more resources such as a variety of vectors and other modifications. Each system has its own advantages and limitations and thus needs to be compared directly. For instance, the bacterial two-hybrid method seems a better fit than the yeast two-hybrid system to screen membrane-associated proteins. In this chapter, we provide detailed protocols for yeast and bacterial two-hybrid systems as well as a comparison of outcomes for each approach using our own and published data.

Indexed as

Two-Hybrid System TechniquesEscherichia coliProtein BindingProtein Interaction MapsRecombinant Fusion ProteinsSaccharomyces cerevisiaeTransformation, BacterialRecombinant Fusion ProteinsBacterial two-hybrid protocolInteractomeIn vivo genetic methodsProtein–protein interactionsYeast two-hybrid protocol

Identifiers

PMID28137570
PMCPMC5737774

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.