Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33166001›Full record

ArticleProtein science : a publication of the Protein Society2021

Structural motifs in protein cores and at protein-protein interfaces are different.

Anna Hadarovich, Devlina Chakravarty, Alexander V Tuzikov, Nir Ben-Tal, Petras J Kundrotas, Ilya A Vakser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Structural Characterization ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  3. Tertiary motifs as building blocks for the design of protein-binding peptides.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2022
    Article
  4. Structural motifs in protein cores and at protein-protein interfaces are different.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2021
    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

6 authors.

Anna HadarovichComputational Biology Program, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA.
Devlina ChakravartyComputational Biology Program, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA.
Alexander V TuzikovUnited Institute of Informatics Problems, National Academy of Sciences, Minsk, Belarus.
Nir Ben-TalDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, George S. Wise Faculty of Life Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Petras J KundrotasComputational Biology Program, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA.
Ilya A VakserComputational Biology Program, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5743-2934

Funding

Integrated Resource for Protein Recognition StudiesR01GM074255 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS LAWRENCE · PI VAKSER, ILYA · 2005 to 2024
$6.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM074255NIH HHS R01GM074255
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Structures of proteins and protein-protein complexes are determined by the same physical principles and thus share a number of similarities. At the same time, there could be differences because in order to function, proteins interact with other molecules, undergo conformations changes, and so forth, which might impose different restraints on the tertiary versus quaternary structures. This study focuses on structural properties of protein-protein interfaces in comparison with the protein core, based on the wealth of currently available structural data and new structure-based approaches. The results showed that physicochemical characteristics, such as amino acid composition, residue-residue contact preferences, and hydrophilicity/hydrophobicity distributions, are similar in protein core and protein-protein interfaces. On the other hand, characteristics that reflect the evolutionary pressure, such as structural composition and packing, are largely different. The results provide important insight into fundamental properties of protein structure and function. At the same time, the results contribute to better understanding of the ways to dock proteins. Recent progress in predicting structures of individual proteins follows the advancement of deep learning techniques and new approaches to residue coevolution data. Protein core could potentially provide large amounts of data for application of the deep learning to docking. However, our results showed that the core motifs are significantly different from those at protein-protein interfaces, and thus may not be directly useful for docking. At the same time, such difference may help to overcome a major obstacle in application of the coevolutionary data to docking-discrimination of the intramolecular information not directly relevant to docking.

Indexed as

Databases, ProteinProtein Interaction MappingSequence AlignmentSoftwareAmino Acid SequenceProteinsProteinsprotein dockingprotein modelingprotein recognitionstructure prediction

Identifiers

PMID33166001
PMCPMC7784743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.