ArticleProteins2021
Simplified geometric representations of protein structures identify complementary interaction interfaces.
Article in Proteins, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Ordered Motions in the Nitric-Oxide Dioxygenase Mechanism of Flavohemoglobin and Assorted Globins with Tightly Coupled Reductases.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023Article
- Understanding Supramolecular Assembly of Supercharged Proteins.ACS central science · 2022Article
- Simplified geometric representations of protein structures identify complementary interaction interfaces.Proteins · 2021Article
- Structural basis for assembly of non-canonical small subunits into type I-C Cascade.Nature communications · 2020Article
- Structural Biology in the Multi-Omics Era.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Protein-protein interactions are critical to protein function, but three-dimensional (3D) arrangements of interacting proteins have proven hard to predict, even given the identities and 3D structures of the interacting partners. Specifically, identifying the relevant pairwise interaction surfaces remains difficult, often relying on shape complementarity with molecular docking while accounting for molecular motions to optimize rigid 3D translations and rotations. However, such approaches can be computationally expensive, and faster, less accurate approximations may prove useful for large-scale prediction and assembly of 3D structures of multi-protein complexes. We asked if a reduced representation of protein geometry retains enough information about molecular properties to predict pairwise protein interaction interfaces that are tolerant of limited structural rearrangements. Here, we describe a reduced representation of 3D protein accessible surfaces on which molecular properties such as charge, hydrophobicity, and evolutionary rate can be easily mapped, implemented in the MorphProt package. Pairs of surfaces are compared to rapidly assess partner-specific potential surface complementarity. On two available benchmarks of 185 overall known protein complexes, we observe predictions comparable to other structure-based tools at correctly identifying protein interaction surfaces. Furthermore, we examined the effect of molecular motion through normal mode simulation on a benchmark receptor-ligand pair and observed no marked loss of predictive accuracy for distortions of up to 6 Å Cα-RMSD. Thus, a shape reduction of protein surfaces retains considerable information about surface complementarity, offers enhanced speed of comparison relative to more complex geometric representations, and exhibits tolerance to conformational changes.
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.