Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41546690›Full record

ArticleEuropean biophysics journal : EBJ2026

Factors controlling protein evolvability-at the molecular scale.

Jorge A Vila

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European biophysics journal : EBJ, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Jorge A VilaIMASL-CONICET, Universidad Nacional de San Luis, Ejército de Los Andes 950, San Luis, 5700, Argentina. jorgevila84@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7557-9350

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This piece serves two purposes. Firstly, it aims to ascertain the extent to which the ‘principle of least action’ enables us to identify which of the potential pathways and trajectories leading to novel protein sequences have the highest evolutionary efficiency—in addition to examining how variations in factors such as protein robustness and folding rates (resulting from the inevitability of destabilizing mutations) could impact this important evolutionary process. Secondly, it seeks to elucidate how ‘epistasis’ may influence the identification of the most efficient evolutionary pathways and trajectories according to the principle of least action—as well as to determine whether the presence of ‘epistatic effects’ may stem from a yet unidentified epistatic force. The initial findings suggest that protein evolution—at a molecular level—may be more predictable than previously thought, as ‘epistasis’ and the ‘principle of least action’ collectively impose constraints on evolutionary paths and trajectories, and consequently, on protein evolvability. Thus, this work should advance our understanding of the main molecular mechanisms that underlie the evolution of mutation-driven proteins and also provide grounds to answer a fundamental evolutionary question: how does Darwinian selection regard all potential trajectories available?

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularProteinsEpistasis, GeneticMutationProtein FoldingProteinsDestabilizing mutationsEpistasisLeast action principleProtein pathwaysProtein robustnessProtein trajectories

Identifiers

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.