Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 428

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Studies of protein‐protein interfaces: A statistical analysis of the hydrophobic effect

Open access
Tsai, Chung‐Jung, Lin, Shuo Liang, Wolfson, Haim J., Nussinov, Ruth·1997·Protein Science

Abstract

Data sets of 362 structurally nonredundant protein‐protein interfaces and of 57 symmetry‐related oligomeric interfaces have been used to explore whether the hydrophobic effect that guides protein folding is also the main driving force for protein‐protein associations. The buried nonpolar surface area has been used to measure the hydrophobic effect. Our analysis indicates that, although the hydrophobic effect plays a dominant role in protein‐protein binding, it is not as strong as that observed in the interior of protein monomers. Comparison of the interiors of the monomers with those of the interfaces reveals that, in general, the hydrophobic amino acids are more frequent in the interior of the monomers than in the interior of the protein‐protein interfaces. On the other hand, a higher proportion of charged and polar residues are buried at the interfaces, suggesting that hydrogen bonds and ion pairs contribute more to the stability of protein binding than to that of protein folding. Moreover, comparison of the interior of the interfaces to protein surfaces indicates that the interfaces are poorer in polar/charged than the surfaces and are richer in hydrophobic residues. The interior of the interfaces appears to constitute a compromise between the stabilization contributed by the hydrophobic effect on the one hand and avoiding patches on the protein surfaces that are too hydrophobic on the other. Such patches would be unfavorable for the unassociated monomers in solution. We conclude that, although the types of interactions are similar between protein‐protein interfaces and single‐chain proteins overall, the contribution of the hydrophobic effect to protein‐protein associations is not as strong as to protein folding. This implies that packing patterns and interatom, or interresidue, pairwise potential functions, derived from monomers, are not ideally suited to predicting and assessing ligand associations or design. These would perform adequately only in cases where the hydrophobic effect at the binding site is substantial.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pro.5560060106

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 22 references

Cited by

See all 428

Metadata

Authors
Tsai, C., Lin, S. L., Wolfson, H. J., & Nussinov, R.
Venue
Protein Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1997-01
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
53-64
ISSN
  • 0961-8368 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-896X
OpenAlex
W2158919479
Cited by
428
References
22
FWCI
4.61
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: Studies of protein‐protein interfaces: A statistical analysis of the hydrophobic effect. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/pro.5560060106
The paper
Tsai, C., Lin, S. L., Wolfson, H. J., & Nussinov, R. (1997). Studies of protein‐protein interfaces: A statistical analysis of the hydrophobic effect. Protein Science. https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.5560060106

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.