ReviewProtein science : a publication of the Protein Society2021
Shifts in amino acid preferences as proteins evolve: A synthesis of experimental and theoretical work.
Review 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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular Footprints on Osmoregulation-Related Genes Associated with Freshwater Colonization by Cetaceans and Sirenians.Journal of molecular evolution · 2023Article
- Evolution of Amino Acid Propensities under Stability-Mediated Epistasis.Molecular biology and evolution · 2022Article
- Shifts in amino acid preferences as proteins evolve: A synthesis of experimental and theoretical work.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Amino acid preferences vary across sites and time. While variation across sites is widely accepted, the extent and frequency of temporal shifts are contentious. Our understanding of the drivers of amino acid preference change is incomplete: To what extent are temporal shifts driven by adaptive versus nonadaptive evolutionary processes? We review phenomena that cause preferences to vary (e.g., evolutionary Stokes shift, contingency, and entrenchment) and clarify how they differ. To determine the extent and prevalence of shifted preferences, we review experimental and theoretical studies. Analyses of natural sequence alignments often detect decreases in homoplasy (convergence and reversions) rates, and variation in replacement rates with time-signals that are consistent with temporally changing preferences. While approaches inferring shifts in preferences from patterns in natural alignments are valuable, they are indirect since multiple mechanisms (both adaptive and nonadaptive) could lead to the observed signal. Alternatively, site-directed mutagenesis experiments allow for a more direct assessment of shifted preferences. They corroborate evidence from multiple sequence alignments, revealing that the preference for an amino acid at a site varies depending on the background sequence. However, shifts in preferences are usually minor in magnitude and sites with significantly shifted preferences are low in frequency. The small yet consistent perturbations in preferences could, nevertheless, jeopardize the accuracy of inference procedures, which assume constant preferences. We conclude by discussing if and how such shifts in preferences might influence widely used time-homogenous inference procedures and potential ways to mitigate such effects.
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.