Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37127974›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Chemistry2020

Deciphering protein post-translational modifications using chemical biology tools.

Anne C Conibear

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Chemistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 116 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
116citing 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

116 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Mining lysine post-translational modification sites by integrating protein language model representations with structural context.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  12. Development of Dimethylsulfonium Probes for Broad Profiling of Methyllysine Reader Proteins.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

56 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

Anne C ConibearSchool of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. a.conibear@uq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5482-6225

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proteins carry out a wide variety of catalytic, regulatory, signalling and structural functions in living systems. Following their assembly on ribosomes and throughout their lifetimes, most eukaryotic proteins are modified by post-translational modifications; small functional groups and complex biomolecules are conjugated to amino acid side chains or termini, and the protein backbone is cleaved, spliced or cyclized, to name just a few examples. These modifications modulate protein activity, structure, location and interactions, and, thereby, control many core biological processes. Aberrant post-translational modifications are markers of cellular stress or malfunction and are implicated in several diseases. Therefore, gaining an understanding of which proteins are modified, at which sites and the resulting biological consequences is an important but complex challenge requiring interdisciplinary approaches. One of the key challenges is accessing precisely modified proteins to assign functional consequences to specific modifications. Chemical biologists have developed a versatile set of tools for accessing specifically modified proteins by applying robust chemistries to biological molecules and developing strategies for synthesizing and ligating proteins. This Review provides an overview of these tools, with selected recent examples of how they have been applied to decipher the roles of a variety of protein post-translational modifications. Relative advantages and disadvantages of each of the techniques are discussed, highlighting examples where they are used in combination and have the potential to address new frontiers in understanding complex biological processes.

Identifiers

PMID37127974

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.