Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34498740›Full record

ArticleBiopolymers2021

A sequence-based method for predicting extant fold switchers that undergo α-helix ↔ β-strand transitions.

Soumya Mishra, Loren L Looger, Lauren L Porter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biopolymers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Fold-Switching Proteins.Annual review of biophysics · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Fluid protein fold space and its implications.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2023
    Article
  6. Distinguishing features of fold-switching proteins.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
  8. AlphaFold2 fails to predict protein fold switching.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2022
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Predictable fold switching by the SARS-CoV-2 protein ORF9b.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2021
    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

3 authors.

Soumya MishraNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Loren L LoogerHoward Hughes Medical Institute, Janelia Research Campus, Ashburn, Virginia, USA.
Lauren L PorterNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2031-8326

Funding

Predictions and experimental validation of fold-switching proteinsZIALM202011 · NLM · NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE · PI PORTER, LAUREN · 2020 to 2025
$6.5M
Howard Hughes Medical InstituteIntramural NIH HHS ZIA LM202011NIH HHSU.S. National Library of Medicine
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Extant fold-switching proteins remodel their secondary structures and change their functions in response to cellular stimuli, regulating biological processes and affecting human health. Despite their biological importance, these proteins remain understudied. Predictive methods are needed to expedite the process of discovering and characterizing more of these shapeshifting proteins. Most previous approaches require a solved structure or all-atom simulations, greatly constraining their use. Here, we propose a high-throughput sequence-based method for predicting extant fold switchers that transition from α-helix in one conformation to β-strand in the other. This method leverages two previous observations: (a) α-helix ↔ β-strand prediction discrepancies from JPred4 are a robust predictor of fold switching, and (b) the fold-switching regions (FSRs) of some extant fold switchers have different secondary structure propensities when expressed by themselves (isolated FSRs) than when expressed within the context of their parent protein (contextualized FSRs). Combining these two observations, we ran JPred4 on 99-fold-switching proteins and found strong correspondence between predicted and experimentally observed α-helix ↔ β-strand discrepancies. To test the overall robustness of this finding, we randomly selected regions of proteins not expected to switch folds (single-fold proteins) and found significantly fewer predicted α-helix ↔ β-strand discrepancies. Combining these discrepancies with the overall percentage of predicted secondary structure, we developed a classifier to identify extant fold switchers (Matthews correlation coefficient of .71). Although this classifier had a high false-negative rate (7/17), its false-positive rate was very low (2/136), suggesting that it can be used to predict a subset of extant fold switchers from a multitude of available genomic sequences.

Indexed as

Protein FoldingProteinsHumansProtein Conformation, alpha-HelicalProtein Conformation, beta-StrandProtein Structure, SecondaryProteinsbioinformaticsfold-switching proteinsmetamorphic proteinsprotein folding

Identifiers

PMID34498740
PMCPMC8545793

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.