The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Selection of representative protein data sets
Open accessAbstract
The Protein Data Bank currently contains about 600 data sets of three‐dimensional protein coordinates determined by X‐ray crystallography or NMR. There is considerable redundancy in the data base, as many protein pairs are identical or very similar in sequence. However, statistical analyses of protein sequence‐structure relations require nonredundant data. We have developed two algorithms to extract from the data base representative sets of protein chains with maximum coverage and minimum redundancy. The first algorithm focuses on optimizing a particular property of the selected proteins and works by successive selection of proteins from an ordered list and exclusion of all neighbors of each selected protein. The other algorithm aims at maximizing the size of the selected set and works by successive thinning out of clusters of similar proteins. Both algorithms are generally applicable to other data bases in which criteria of similarity can be defined and relate to problems in graph theory. The largest nonredundant set extracted from the current release of the Protein Data Bank has 155 protein chains. In this set, no two proteins have sequence similarity higher than a certain cutoff (30% identical residues for aligned subsequences longer than 80 residues), yet all structurally unique protein families are represented. Periodically updated lists of representative data sets are available by electronic mail from the file server “netserv@embl‐heidelberg.de.” The selection may be useful in statistical approaches to protein folding as well as in the analysis and documentation of the known spectrum of three‐dimensional protein structures.
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
Kabsch, W., & Sander, C. (1983) · Biopolymers · doi:10.1002/bip.360221211 · Cited by 15,320
Self-citation
Cited by
STRING v10: protein–protein interaction networks, integrated over the tree of life
Szklarczyk, D., Franceschini, A., Wyder, S., Forslund, K., Heller, D., Huerta-Cepas, J., Simonovic, M., Roth, A., Santos, A., Tsafou, K. P., et al. (2015) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gku1003 · Cited by 10,436
Improved Prediction of Signal Peptides: SignalP 3.0
Dyrløv Bendtsen, J., Nielsen, H., von Heijne, G., & Brunak, S. (2004) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2004.05.028 · Cited by 6,350
Assessing the accuracy of prediction algorithms for classification: an overview
Baldi, P., Brunak, S., Chauvin, Y., Andersen, C. A. F., & Nielsen, H. (2000) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/16.5.412 · Cited by 2,111
Twilight zone of protein sequence alignments
Rost, B. (1999) · Protein Engineering, Design and Selection · doi:10.1093/protein/12.2.85 · Cited by 1,833
UniRef: comprehensive and non-redundant UniProt reference clusters
Suzek, B. E., Huang, H., McGarvey, P., Mazumder, R., & Wu, C. H. (2007) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btm098 · Cited by 1,613
Metadata
- Authors
- Hobohm, U., Scharf, M., Schneider, R., & Sander, C.
- Venue
- Protein Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1992-03
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 409-417
- ISSN
- 0961-8368 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-896X
- OpenAlex
- W2137995988
- Cited by
- 819
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Selection of representative protein data sets. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/pro.5560010313
- The paper
- Hobohm, U., Scharf, M., Schneider, R., & Sander, C. (1992). Selection of representative protein data sets. Protein Science. https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.5560010313
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.