Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33846507›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Coevolution underlies GPCR-G protein selectivity and functionality.

Min Jae Seo, Joongyu Heo, Kyunghui Kim, Ka Young Chung, Wookyung Yu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The GPCR Connection: Linking Alzheimer's Disease and Glioblastoma.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

5 authors.

Min Jae SeoDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, DGIST, 333 Techno jungang-daero, Daegu, 42988, Republic of Korea.
Joongyu HeoDepartment of Undergraduate Studies, DGIST, 333 Techno jungang-daero, Daegu, 42988, Republic of Korea.
Kyunghui KimDepartment of Undergraduate Studies, DGIST, 333 Techno jungang-daero, Daegu, 42988, Republic of Korea.
Ka Young ChungSchool of Pharmacy, Sungkyunkwan University, 2066 Seoburo, Jangan-gu, Suwon, 16419, Republic of Korea.
Wookyung YuDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, DGIST, 333 Techno jungang-daero, Daegu, 42988, Republic of Korea. wkyu@dgist.ac.kr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) regulate diverse physiological events, which makes them as the major targets for many approved drugs. G proteins are downstream molecules that receive signals from GPCRs and trigger cell responses. The GPCR-G protein selectivity mechanism on how they properly and timely interact is still unclear. Here, we analyzed model GPCRs (i.e. HTR, DAR) and Gα proteins with a coevolutionary tool, statistical coupling analysis. The results suggested that 5-hydroxytryptamine receptors and dopamine receptors have common conserved and coevolved residues. The Gα protein also have conserved and coevolved residues. These coevolved residues were implicated in the molecular functions of the analyzed proteins. We also found specific coevolving pairs related to the selectivity between GPCR and G protein were identified. We propose that these results would contribute to better understandings of not only the functional residues of GPCRs and Gα proteins but also GPCR-G protein selectivity mechanisms.

Indexed as

Biological CoevolutionEvolution, MolecularGTP-Binding ProteinsHumansReceptors, G-Protein-CoupledSignal TransductionGTP-Binding ProteinsReceptors, G-Protein-Coupled

Identifiers

PMID33846507
PMCPMC8041822

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.