ArticlePLoS computational biology2022
Dissecting peripheral protein-membrane interfaces.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Spider venom phospholipase D toxin structure: Interfacial binding site, mechanism, activation, and head group preference.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- A membrane insertion code for intrinsically disordered proteins.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Decoding Protein-Membrane Binding Interfaces from Surface-Fingerprint-Based Geometric Deep Learning and Molecular Dynamics Simulations.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026Article
- In vitro methods for measuring lipid binding, transfer and competitive displacement reactions by peripheral membrane proteins.Methods in enzymology · 2026Article
- The polybasic puzzle: how N-terminal charges modulate GαiCell communication and signaling : CCS · 2025Article
- BioDolphin as a comprehensive database of lipid-protein binding interactions.Communications chemistry · 2024Article
- The conformational plasticity of structurally unrelated lipid transport proteins correlates with their mode of action.PLoS biology · 2024Article
- Ligandability at the Membrane Interface of GPx4 Revealed through a Reverse Micelle Fragment Screening Platform.JACS Au · 2024Article
- POTRA domains of the TamA insertase interact with the outer membrane and modulate membrane properties.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Elucidating the complex membrane binding of a protein with multiple anchoring domains using extHMMM.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Analysis of AlphaMissense data in different protein groups and structural context.Scientific data · 2024Article
- Ligandability at the membrane interface of GPx4 revealed through a reverse micelle fragment screening platform.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Using deep learning and large protein language models to predict protein-membrane interfaces of peripheral membrane proteins.Bioinformatics advances · 2024Article
- Surface plasmon resonance and microscale thermophoresis approaches for determining the affinity of perforin for calcium ions.Frontiers in immunology · 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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Peripheral membrane proteins (PMPs) include a wide variety of proteins that have in common to bind transiently to the chemically complex interfacial region of membranes through their interfacial binding site (IBS). In contrast to protein-protein or protein-DNA/RNA interfaces, peripheral protein-membrane interfaces are poorly characterized. We collected a dataset of PMP domains representative of the variety of PMP functions: membrane-targeting domains (Annexin, C1, C2, discoidin C2, PH, PX), enzymes (PLA, PLC/D) and lipid-transfer proteins (START). The dataset contains 1328 experimental structures and 1194 AphaFold models. We mapped the amino acid composition and structural patterns of the IBS of each protein in this dataset, and evaluated which were more likely to be found at the IBS compared to the rest of the domains' accessible surface. In agreement with earlier work we find that about two thirds of the PMPs in the dataset have protruding hydrophobes (Leu, Ile, Phe, Tyr, Trp and Met) at their IBS. The three aromatic amino acids Trp, Tyr and Phe are a hallmark of PMPs IBS regardless of whether they protrude on loops or not. This is also the case for lysines but not arginines suggesting that, unlike for Arg-rich membrane-active peptides, the less membrane-disruptive lysine is preferred in PMPs. Another striking observation was the over-representation of glycines at the IBS of PMPs compared to the rest of their surface, possibly procuring IBS loops a much-needed flexibility to insert in-between membrane lipids. The analysis of the 9 superfamilies revealed amino acid distribution patterns in agreement with their known functions and membrane-binding mechanisms. Besides revealing novel amino acids patterns at protein-membrane interfaces, our work contributes a new PMP dataset and an analysis pipeline that can be further built upon for future studies of PMPs properties, or for developing PMPs prediction tools using for example, machine learning approaches.
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.