ArticleMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2018
Recognition of Protein Pupylation Sites by Adopting Resampling Approach.
Article in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identifying Pupylation Proteins and Sites by Incorporating Multiple Methods.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
- PUP-Fuse: Prediction of Protein Pupylation Sites by Integrating Multiple Sequence Representations.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With the in-depth study of posttranslational modification sites, protein ubiquitination has become the key problem to study the molecular mechanism of posttranslational modification. Pupylation is a widely used process in which a prokaryotic ubiquitin-like protein (Pup) is attached to a substrate through a series of biochemical reactions. However, the experimental methods of identifying pupylation sites is often time-consuming and laborious. This study aims to propose an improved approach for predicting pupylation sites. Firstly, the Pearson correlation coefficient was used to reflect the correlation among different amino acid pairs calculated by the frequency of each amino acid. Then according to a descending ranked order, the multiple types of features were filtered separately by values of Pearson correlation coefficient. Thirdly, to get a qualified balanced dataset, the K-means principal component analysis (KPCA) oversampling technique was employed to synthesize new positive samples and Fuzzy undersampling method was employed to reduce the number of negative samples. Finally, the performance of our method was verified by means of jackknife and a 10-fold cross-validation test. The average results of 10-fold cross-validation showed that the sensitivity (Sn) was 90.53%, specificity (Sp) was 99.8%, accuracy (Acc) was 95.09%, and Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) was 0.91. Moreover, an independent test dataset was used to further measure its performance, and the prediction results achieved the Acc of 83.75%, MCC of 0.49, which was superior to previous predictors. The better performance and stability of our proposed method showed it is an effective way to predict pupylation sites.
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.