The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The complexity of complexes in signal transduction
Abstract
Many activities of cells are controlled by cell‐surface receptors, which in response to ligands, trigger intracellular signaling reactions that elicit cellular responses. A hallmark of these signaling reactions is the reversible nucleation of multicomponent complexes, which typically begin to assemble when ligand‐receptor binding allows an enzyme, often a kinase, to create docking sites for signaling molecules through chemical modifications, such as tyrosine phosphorylation. One function of such docking sites is the co‐localization of enzymes with their substrates, which can enhance both enzyme activity and specificity. The directed assembly of complexes can also influence the sensitivity of cellular responses to ligand‐receptor binding kinetics and determine whether a cellular response is up‐ or downregulated in response to a ligand stimulus. The full functional implications of ligand‐stimulated complex formation are difficult to discern intuitively. Complex formation is governed by conditional interactions among multivalent signaling molecules and influenced by quantitative properties of both the components in a system and the system itself. Even a simple list of the complexes that can potentially form in response to a ligand stimulus is problematic because of the number of ways signaling molecules can be modified and combined. Here, we review the role of multicomponent complexes in signal transduction and advocate the use of mathematical models that incorporate detail at the level of molecular domains to study this important aspect of cellular signaling. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Mass spectrometry-based proteomics
Aebersold, R., & Mann, M. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01511 · Cited by 6,955
Vogelstein, B., Lane, D., & Levine, A. J. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35042675 · Cited by 6,607 · cited 2×
“For example, Endy and Brent (2001) pointed out that the interactions of Ste5p, Ste11p, Ste7p, and Fus3p, illustrated in Figure 1c, can lead to the formation of 25,666 distinct chemical species, and Arkin (2001) mentioned that the tumor suppressor protein p53 (Vogelstein et al., 2000) can occupy 2(27) = 134,217,728 pho…”
BackgroundComputational systems biology.
Kitano, H. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01254 · Cited by 2,209
THE HIGH-AFFINITY I g E RECEPTOR (FcεRI): From Physiology to Pathology
Kinet, J.-P. (1999) · Annual Review of Immunology · doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.17.1.931 · Cited by 968
Cited by
Reconstruction of cellular signalling networks and analysis of their properties
Papin, J. A., Hunter, T., Palsson, B. O., & Subramaniam, S. (2005) · Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology · doi:10.1038/nrm1570 · Cited by 532
Blinov, M. L., Faeder, J. R., Goldstein, B., & Hlavacek, W. S. (2004) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bth378 · Cited by 429
Self-citationChen, W. W., Schoeberl, B., Jasper, P. J., Niepel, M., Nielsen, U. B., Lauffenburger, D. A., & Sorger, P. K. (2009) · Molecular Systems Biology · doi:10.1038/msb.2008.74 · Cited by 391
Rules for Modeling Signal-Transduction Systems
Hlavacek, W. S., Faeder, J. R., Blinov, M. L., Posner, R. G., Hucka, M., & Fontana, W. (2006) · Science's STKE · doi:10.1126/stke.3442006re6 · Cited by 350
Self-citationKiyatkin, A., Aksamitiene, E., Markevich, N. I., Borisov, N. M., Hoek, J. B., & Kholodenko, B. N. (2006) · Journal of Biological Chemistry · doi:10.1074/jbc.m600482200 · Cited by 195
Metadata
- Authors
- Hlavacek, W. S., Faeder, J. R., Blinov, M. L., Perelson, A. S., & Goldstein, B.
- Venue
- Biotechnology and Bioengineering
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-12-30
- Volume
- 84
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 783-794
- ISSN
- 0006-3592 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0290
- OpenAlex
- W2034492556
- Cited by
- 207
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 3.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.