Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29100081›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in structural biology2018

Compensatory mutations and epistasis for protein function.

Jay F Storz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in structural biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 91 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Evolutionary rewiring of the dynamic network underpinning allosteric epistasis in NS1 of the influenza A virus.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Bioengineering hybrid artificial life.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. A fitness distribution law for amino-acid replacements.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jay F StorzUniversity of Nebraska, School of Biological Sciences, Lincoln, NE 68588-0114, United States. Electronic address: jstorz2@unl.edu.
University of Nebraska–Lincoln · US

Funding

Mutational Pleiotropy, Epistasis, and the Adaptive Evolution of Hemoglobin FunctionR01HL087216 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN · PI STORZ, JAY · 2008 to 2021
$4.5M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL087216
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adaptive protein evolution may be facilitated by neutral amino acid mutations that confer no benefit when they first arise but which potentiate subsequent function-altering mutations via direct or indirect structural mechanisms. Theoretical and empirical results indicate that such compensatory interactions (intramolecular epistasis) can exert a strong influence on trajectories of protein evolution. For this reason, assessing the form and prevalence of intramolecular epistasis and characterizing biophysical mechanisms of compensatory interaction are important research goals at the nexus of structural biology and molecular evolution. Here I review recent insights derived from protein-engineering studies, and I describe an approach for identifying and characterizing mechanisms of epistasis that integrates experimental data on structure-function relationships with analyses of comparative sequence data.

Indexed as

Epistasis, GeneticEvolution, MolecularMutationQuantitative Structure-Activity RelationshipAmino Acid SubstitutionAnimalsGenetic Complementation TestHumansProteinsProteins

Identifiers

PMID29100081
PMCPMC5936477
OpenAlexW2765748860

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.