ArticlePeerJ2019
Evolutionary couplings detect side-chain interactions.
Article in PeerJ, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- A crucial active site network of titratable residues guides catalysis and NADProtein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2025Article
- Modular Structure and Polymerization Status of GABAInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- The Arabidopsis AtSWEET13 transporter discriminates sugars by selective facial and positional substrate recognition.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Exploring Oxidoreductases from Extremophiles for Biosynthesis in a Non-Aqueous System.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- From systems to structure - using genetic data to model protein structures.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2022Review
- Antigenic evolution of human influenza H3N2 neuraminidase is constrained by charge balancing.eLife · 2021Article
- Improving integrative 3D modeling into low- to medium-resolution electron microscopy structures with evolutionary couplings.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2021Article
- Coevolutionary Analysis of Protein Subfamilies by Sequence Reweighting.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Phylogenetic weighting does little to improve the accuracy of evolutionary coupling analyses.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Patterns of amino acid covariation in large protein sequence alignments can inform the prediction of de novo protein structures, binding interfaces, and mutational effects. While algorithms that detect these so-called evolutionary couplings between residues have proven useful for practical applications, less is known about how and why these methods perform so well, and what insights into biological processes can be gained from their application. Evolutionary coupling algorithms are commonly benchmarked by comparison to true structural contacts derived from solved protein structures. However, the methods used to determine true structural contacts are not standardized and different definitions of structural contacts may have important consequences for interpreting the results from evolutionary coupling analyses and understanding their overall utility. Here, we show that evolutionary coupling analyses are significantly more likely to identify structural contacts between side-chain atoms than between backbone atoms. We use both simulations and empirical analyses to highlight that purely backbone-based definitions of true residue-residue contacts (i.e., based on the distance between Cα atoms) may underestimate the accuracy of evolutionary coupling algorithms by as much as 40% and that a commonly used reference point (Cβ atoms) underestimates the accuracy by 10-15%. These findings show that co-evolutionary outcomes differ according to which atoms participate in residue-residue interactions and suggest that accounting for different interaction types may lead to further improvements to contact-prediction methods.
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.