ArticleGenomics, proteomics & bioinformatics2020
Exploring Potential Signals of Selection for Disordered Residues in Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic Proteins.
Article in Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics, 2020. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep learning tools predict variants in disordered regions with lower sensitivity.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Determinants of associations between codon and amino acid usage patterns of microbial communities and the environment inferred based on a cross-biome metagenomic analysis.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2023Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) are an important class of proteins in all domains of life for their functional importance. However, how nature has shaped the disorder potential of prokaryotic and eukaryotic proteins is still not clearly known. Randomly generated sequences are free of any selective constraints, thus these sequences are commonly used as null models. Considering different types of random protein models, here we seek to understand how the disorder potential of natural eukaryotic and prokaryotic proteins differs from random sequences. Comparing proteome-wide disorder content between real and random sequences of 12 model organisms, we noticed that eukaryotic proteins are enriched in disordered regions compared to random sequences, but in prokaryotes such regions are depleted. By analyzing the position-wise disorder profile, we show that there is a generally higher disorder near the N- and C-terminal regions of eukaryotic proteins as compared to the random models; however, either no or a weak such trend was found in prokaryotic proteins. Moreover, here we show that this preference is not caused by the amino acid or nucleotide composition at the respective sites. Instead, these regions were found to be endowed with a higher fraction of protein-protein binding sites, suggesting their functional importance. We discuss several possible explanations for this pattern, such as improving the efficiency of protein-protein interaction, ribosome movement during translation, and post-translational modification. However, further studies are needed to clearly understand the biophysical mechanisms causing the trend.
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.