Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33453500›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in structural biology2021

Evolution, folding, and design of TIM barrels and related proteins.

Sergio Romero-Romero, Sina Kordes, Florian Michel, Birte Höcker

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in structural biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing 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

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Stability and cooperativity in chimeric de novo TIM barrels via quarter swapping.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Mutational and structural studies of (βα)Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2024
    Article
  12. Diversifying de novo TIM barrels by hallucination.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Retracing the evolution of a modern periplasmic binding protein.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2023
    Article
  18. Exploring the Protein Sequence Space with Global Generative Models.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2023
    Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors.

Sergio Romero-RomeroDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Bayreuth, 95447 Bayreuth, Germany.
Sina KordesDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Bayreuth, 95447 Bayreuth, Germany.
Florian MichelDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Bayreuth, 95447 Bayreuth, Germany.
Birte HöckerDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Bayreuth, 95447 Bayreuth, Germany. Electronic address: birte.hoecker@uni-bayreuth.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proteins are chief actors in life that perform a myriad of exquisite functions. This diversity has been enabled through the evolution and diversification of protein folds. Analysis of sequences and structures strongly suggest that numerous protein pieces have been reused as building blocks and propagated to many modern folds. This information can be traced to understand how the protein world has diversified. In this review, we discuss the latest advances in the analysis of protein evolutionary units, and we use as a model system one of the most abundant and versatile topologies, the TIM-barrel fold, to highlight the existing common principles that interconnect protein evolution, structure, folding, function, and design.

Indexed as

Protein FoldingProteinsAmino Acid SequenceEvolution, MolecularProteins

Identifiers

PMID33453500
PMCPMC8250049

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.