Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28250374›Full record

ReviewProteomes2014

Dynamic New World: Refining Our View of Protein Structure, Function and Evolution.

Ranjan V Mannige

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Proteomes, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

1 author.

Ranjan V MannigeMolecular Foundry, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1 Cyclotron Road,Berkeley, CA 94720, USA. rvmannige@lbl.gov.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proteins are crucial to the functioning of all lifeforms. Traditional understanding posits that a single protein occupies a single structure ("fold"), which performs a single function. This view is radically challenged with the recognition that high structural dynamism-the capacity to be extra "floppy"-is more prevalent in functional proteins than previously assumed. As reviewed here, this dynamic take on proteins affects our understanding of protein "structure", function, and evolution, and even gives us a glimpse into protein origination. Specifically, this review will discuss historical developments concerning protein structure, and important new relationships between dynamism and aspects of protein sequence, structure, binding modes, binding promiscuity, evolvability, and origination. Along the way, suggestions will be provided for how key parts of textbook definitions-that so far have excluded membership to intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs)-could be modified to accommodate our more dynamic understanding of proteins.

Indexed as

evolutionfunctionintrinsically disorderedpromiscuityprotein dynamismstructure

Identifiers

PMID28250374
PMCPMC5302727

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.