Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31811259›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

StructureDistiller: Structural relevance scoring identifies the most informative entries of a contact map.

Sebastian Bittrich, Michael Schroeder, Dirk Labudde

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sebastian BittrichUniversity of Applied Sciences Mittweida, Mittweida, 09648, Germany. sebastian.bittrich@rcsb.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3576-0387
Michael SchroederBiotechnology Center (BIOTEC), TU Dresden, Dresden, 01307, Germany.
Dirk LabuddeUniversity of Applied Sciences Mittweida, Mittweida, 09648, Germany.
Hochschule Mittweida · DETechnische Universität Dresden · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protein folding and structure prediction are two sides of the same coin. Contact maps and the related techniques of constraint-based structure reconstruction can be considered as unifying aspects of both processes. We present the Structural Relevance (SR) score which quantifies the information content of individual contacts and residues in the context of the whole native structure. The physical process of protein folding is commonly characterized with spatial and temporal resolution: some residues are Early Folding while others are Highly Stable with respect to unfolding events. We employ the proposed SR score to demonstrate that folding initiation and structure stabilization are subprocesses realized by distinct sets of residues. The example of cytochrome c is used to demonstrate how StructureDistiller identifies the most important contacts needed for correct protein folding. This shows that entries of a contact map are not equally relevant for structural integrity. The proposed StructureDistiller algorithm identifies contacts with the highest information content; these entries convey unique constraints not captured by other contacts. Identification of the most informative contacts effectively doubles resilience toward contacts which are not observed in the native contact map. Furthermore, this knowledge increases reconstruction fidelity on sparse contact maps significantly by 0.4 Å.

Indexed as

Databases, ProteinProtein ConformationAlgorithmsAnimalsComputational BiologyCytochromes cHorsesHydrogenHydrogen BondingMutationMyocardiumProtein FoldingProteinsSoftwareCytochromes cHydrogenProteins

Identifiers

PMID31811259
PMCPMC6898053
OpenAlexW2992236008

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.