Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34455641›Full record

ArticleProteins2021

Assessment of domain interactions in the fourteenth round of the Critical Assessment of Structure Prediction (CASP14).

R Dustin Schaeffer, Lisa Kinch, Andriy Kryshtafovych, Nick V Grishin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proteins, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. The ubiquitin E3 ligase BFAR promotes degradation of PNPLA3.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

R Dustin SchaefferDepartment of Biophysics, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6502-1425
Lisa KinchHoward Hughes Medical Institute, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3041-2615
Andriy KryshtafovychProtein Structure Prediction Center, Genome and Biomedical Sciences Facilities, University of California, Davis, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5066-7178
Nick V GrishinDepartment of Biophysics, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.

Funding

Prospective analysis to determine model accuracy performance and boundaries in the post-AlphaFold2 environmentR01GM100482 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI FIDELIS, KRZYSZTOF A · 2012 to 2025
$11.1M
Computational analysis of proteinsR35GM127390 · NIGMS · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI GRISHIN, NICK V. · 2018 to 2022
$1.5M
Howard Hughes Medical InstituteNIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM100482NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM127390
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The high accuracy of some CASP14 models at the domain level prompted a more detailed evaluation of structure predictions on whole targets. For the first time in critical assessment of structure prediction (CASP), we evaluated accuracy of difficult domain assembly in models submitted for multidomain targets where the community predicted individual evaluation units (EUs) with greater accuracy than full-length targets. Ten proteins with domain interactions that did not show evidence of conformational change and were not involved in significant oligomeric contacts were chosen as targets for the domain interaction assessment. Groups were ranked using complementary interaction scores (F1, QS score, and Jaccard coefficient), and their predictions were evaluated for their ability to correctly model inter-domain interfaces and overall protein folds. Target performance was broadly grouped into two clusters. The first consisted primarily of targets containing two EUs wherein predictors more broadly predicted domain positioning and interfacial contacts correctly. The other consisted of complex two-EU and three-EU targets where few predictors performed well. The highest ranked predictor, AlphaFold2, produced high-accuracy models on eight out of 10 targets. Their interdomain scores on three of these targets were significantly higher than all other groups and were responsible for their overall outperformance in the category. We further highlight the performance of AlphaFold2 and the next best group, BAKER-experimental on several interesting targets.

Indexed as

Models, MolecularProtein ConformationProtein FoldingProtein Interaction Domains and MotifsProteinsComputational BiologyProtein BindingSequence Analysis, ProteinSoftwareProteinsCASP14classificationfold spaceprotein domainsprotein-protein interactionsprotein structuresequence homologs multidomain proteinsstructure prediction

Identifiers

PMID34455641
PMCPMC8616818

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.