Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 323

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mining α-Helix-Forming Molecular Recognition Features with Cross Species Sequence Alignments

Open access
Cheng, Yugong, Oldfield, Christopher J., Meng, Jingwei, Romero, Pedro, Uversky, Vladimir N., Dunker, A. Keith·2007·Biochemistry

Abstract

Previously described algorithms for mining alpha-helix-forming molecular recognition elements (MoREs), described by Oldfield et al. (Oldfield, C. J., Cheng, Y., Cortese, M. S., Brown, C. J., Uversky, V. N., and Dunker, A. K. (2005) Comparing and combining predictors of mostly disordered proteins, Biochemistry 44, 1989-2000), also known as molecular recognition features (MoRFs) (Mohan, A., Oldfield, C. J., Radivojac, P., Vacic, V., Cortese, M. S., Dunker, A. K., and Uversky, V. N. (2006) Analysis of Molecular Recognition Features (MoRFs), J. Mol. Biol. 362, 1043-1059), revealed that regions undergoing disorder-to-order transition are involved in many molecular recognition events and are crucial for protein-protein interactions. However, these algorithms were developed using a training data set of a limited size. Here we propose to improve the prediction algorithms by (1) including additional alpha-MoRF examples and their cross species homologues in the positive training set, (2) carefully extracting monomer structure chains from the Protein Data Bank (PDB) as the negative training set, (3) including attributes from recently developed disorder predictors, secondary structure predictions, and amino acid indices, and (4) constructing neural network based predictors and performing validation. Over 50 regions which undergo disorder-to-order transition that were identified in the PDB together with a set of corresponding cross species homologues of each structure-based example were included in a new positive training set. Over 1500 attributes, including disorder predictions, secondary structure predictions, and amino acid indices, were evaluated by the conditional probability method. The top attributes, including VSL2 and VL3 disorder predictions and several physicochemical propensities of amino acid residues, were used to develop the feed forward neural networks. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the resulting predictor, alpha-MoRF-PredII, were 0.87 +/- 0.10, 0.87 +/- 0.11, and 0.87 +/- 0.08 over 10 cross validations, respectively. We present the results of these analyses and validation examples to discuss the potential improvement of the alpha-MoRF-PredII prediction accuracy.

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 · 10.1021/bi7012273

Cites

11 of 11 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

Cited by

See all 323

Metadata

Authors
Cheng, Y., Oldfield, C. J., Meng, J., Romero, P., Uversky, V. N., & Dunker, A. K.
Venue
Biochemistry
Published
2007-11-01
Volume
46
Issue
47
Pages
13468-13477
ISSN
  • 0006-2960 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-4995
OpenAlex
W1994151152
Cited by
323
References
11
FWCI
5.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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.