Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 240

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

MULTIPROSPECTOR: An algorithm for the prediction of protein–protein interactions by multimeric threading

Open access
Lu, Long, Lu, Hui, Skolnick, Jeffrey·2002·Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics

Abstract

In this postgenomic era, the ability to identify protein–protein interactions on a genomic scale is very important to assist in the assignment of physiological function. Because of the increasing number of solved structures involving protein complexes, the time is ripe to extend threading to the prediction of quaternary structure. In this spirit, a multimeric threading approach has been developed. The approach is comprised of two phases. In the first phase, traditional threading on a single chain is applied to generate a set of potential structures for the query sequences. In particular, we use our recently developed threading algorithm, PROSPECTOR. Then, for those proteins whose template structures are part of a known complex, we rethread on both partners in the complex and now include a protein–protein interfacial energy. To perform this analysis, a database of multimeric protein structures has been constructed, the necessary interfacial pairwise potentials have been derived, and a set of empirical indicators to identify true multimers based on the threading Z‐score and the magnitude of the interfacial energy have been established. The algorithm has been tested on a benchmark set comprised of 40 homodimers, 15 heterodimers, and 69 monomers that were scanned against a protein library of 2478 structures that comprise a representative set of structures in the Protein Data Bank. Of these, the method correctly recognized and assigned 36 homodimers, 15 heterodimers, and 65 monomers. This protocol was applied to identify partners and assign quaternary structures of proteins found in the yeast database of interacting proteins. Our multimeric threading algorithm correctly predicts 144 interacting proteins, compared to the 56 (26) cases assigned by PSI‐BLAST using a (less) permissive E‐value of 1 (0.01). Next, all possible pairs of yeast proteins have been examined. Predictions (n = 2865) of protein–protein interactions are made; 1138 of these 2865 interactions have counterparts in the Database of Interacting Proteins. In contrast, PSI‐BLAST made 1781 predictions, and 1215 have counterparts in DIP. An estimation of the false‐negative rate for yeast‐predicted interactions has also been provided. Thus, a promising approach to help assist in the assignment of protein–protein interactions on a genomic scale has been developed. Proteins 2002;49:350–364. © 2002 Wiley‐Liss, 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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/prot.10222

Cites

6 of 6 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 6 references

Cited by

See all 240

Metadata

Authors
Lu, L., Lu, H., & Skolnick, J.
Venue
Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-09-19
Volume
49
Issue
3
Pages
350-364
ISSN
  • 0887-3585 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0134
OpenAlex
W2160223331
Cited by
240
References
6
FWCI
4.86
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: MULTIPROSPECTOR: An algorithm for the prediction of protein–protein interactions by multimeric threading. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/prot.10222
The paper
Lu, L., Lu, H., & Skolnick, J. (2002). MULTIPROSPECTOR: An algorithm for the prediction of protein–protein interactions by multimeric threading. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.10222

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.