Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29980221›Full record

ArticleBiology direct2018

Modeling protein folding in vivo.

Irina Sorokina, Arcady Mushegian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology direct, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Folding and Evolution of a Repeat Protein on the Ribosome.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2022
    Article
  6. Artificial Intelligence Deconstructs Drug TargetingACS medicinal chemistry letters · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Effects of Ionic Liquids on Metalloproteins.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Topological descriptions of protein folding.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019
    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

2 authors.

Irina SorokinaStrenic LLC, McLean, VA, 22102, USA. strenicbio@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-1531-1832
Arcady Mushegian, McLean, USA.

Funding

Strenic LLC n/a
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A half century of studying protein folding in vitro and modeling it in silico has not provided us with a reliable computational method to predict the native conformations of proteins de novo, let alone identify the intermediates on their folding pathways. In this Opinion article, we suggest that the reason for this impasse is the over-reliance on current physical models of protein folding that are based on the assumption that proteins are able to fold spontaneously without assistance. These models arose from studies conducted in vitro on a biased sample of smaller, easier-to-isolate proteins, whose native structures appear to be thermodynamically stable. Meanwhile, the vast empirical data on the majority of larger proteins suggests that once these proteins are completely denatured in vitro, they cannot fold into native conformations without assistance. Moreover, they tend to lose their native conformations spontaneously and irreversibly in vitro, and therefore such conformations must be metastable. We propose a model of protein folding that is based on the notion that the folding of all proteins in the cell is mediated by the actions of the "protein folding machine" that includes the ribosome, various chaperones, and other components involved in co-translational or post-translational formation, maintenance and repair of protein native conformations in vivo. The most important and universal component of the protein folding machine consists of the ribosome in complex with the welcoming committee chaperones. The concerted actions of molecular machinery in the ribosome peptidyl transferase center, in the exit tunnel, and at the surface of the ribosome result in the application of mechanical and other forces to the nascent peptide, reducing its conformational entropy and possibly creating strain in the peptide backbone. The resulting high-energy conformation of the nascent peptide allows it to fold very fast and to overcome high kinetic barriers along the folding pathway. The early folding intermediates in vivo are stabilized by interactions with the ribosome and welcoming committee chaperones and would not be able to exist in vitro in the absence of such cellular components. In vitro experiments that unfold proteins by heat or chemical treatment produce denaturation ensembles that are very different from folding intermediates in vivo and therefore have very limited use in reconstructing the in vivo folding pathways. We conclude that computational modeling of protein folding should deemphasize the notion of unassisted thermodynamically controlled folding, and should focus instead on the step-by-step reverse engineering of the folding process as it actually occurs in vivo. REVIEWERS: This article was reviewed by Eugene Koonin and Frank Eisenhaber.

Indexed as

AnimalsHumansPeptidyl TransferasesProtein BindingProtein BiosynthesisProtein ConformationProtein FoldingProteinsRibosomesPeptidyl TransferasesProteinsChaperoneCo-translational protein foldingFast protein foldingMetastable proteinMotions at the peptidyl transferase centerPeptide rotationProtein folding in vivoProtein folding machineRibosomeTrigger factor

Identifiers

PMID29980221
PMCPMC6035440

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.