ReviewJournal of structural biology: X2021
Systematized analysis of secondary structure dependence of key structural features of residues in soluble and membrane-bound proteins.
Review in Journal of structural biology: X, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measuring and locating the changes in protein structure using MELO.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Three-Dimensional Interaction Homology: Deconstructing Residue-Residue and Residue-Lipid Interactions in Membrane Proteins.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- 3D interaction homology: The hydrophobic residues alanine, isoleucine, leucine, proline and valine play different structural roles in soluble and membrane proteins.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Knowledge of three-dimensional protein structure is integral to most modern drug discovery efforts. Recent advancements have highlighted new techniques for 3D protein structure determination and, where structural data cannot be collected experimentally, prediction of protein structure. We have undertaken a major effort to use existing protein structures to collect, characterize, and catalogue the inter-atomic interactions that define and compose 3D structure by mapping hydropathic interaction environments as maps in 3D space. This work has been performed on a residue-by-residue basis, where we have seen evidence for relationships between environment character, residue solvent-accessible surface areas and their secondary structures. In this graphical review, we apply principles from our earlier studies and expand the scope to all common amino acid residue types in both soluble and membrane proteins. Key to this analysis is parsing the Ramachandran plot to an 8-by-8 chessboard to define secondary structure bins. Our analysis yielded a number of quantitative discoveries: 1) increased fraction of hydrophobic residues (alanine, isoleucine, leucine, phenylalanine and valine) in membrane proteins compared to their fractions in soluble proteins; 2) less burial coupled with significant increases in favorable hydrophobic interactions for hydrophobic residues in membrane proteins compared to soluble proteins; and 3) higher burial and more favorable polar interactions for polar residues now preferring the interior of membrane proteins. These observations and the supporting data should provide benchmarks for current studies of protein residues in different environments and may be able to guide future protein structure prediction efforts.
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.