The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Normalized and Directional Interplay Scoring for the Interrogation of Proteoform Data
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.1021/acs.jproteome.4c00877
Abstract
Histone proteoforms, often presenting multiple co-occurring post-translational modifications (PTMs), are central to chromatin regulation and gene expression. A proteoform is a specific form of a protein that includes variations arising from genetic changes, alternative RNA splicing, proteolytic processing, and PTMs. Genomic context-dependent histone proteoforms define the histone code, influencing cellular phenotype by dictating interactions with DNA and chromatin-associated proteins. Understanding the dynamics of histone proteoforms is essential for elucidating chromatin-based regulatory mechanisms. Advances in middle-down and top-down proteomics methods enable accurate identification and quantitation of hundreds to thousands of proteoforms in a single run. However, the resulting data complexity presents significant challenges for analysis and visualization. Here, we introduce new computational methods to analyze the dynamics of histone PTMs and demonstrate their use in mouse organs during aging. We have developed and benchmarked two novel PTM crosstalk scores. The score that we term ‘Normalized Interplay’ addresses limitations of the original crosstalk score ‘Interplay’ providing a more complete and accurate measure of PTM crosstalk. The second score, ‘delta I’ or Directional Interplay is an asymmetric measure quantifying the magnitude and directionality of crosstalk between PTMs. Applying our two-stage scoring approach to data from CrosstalkDB, a community resource that curates proteoform-level data, reveals the dynamics of histone H3 modifications during aging. The source code is available under an Apache license at https://github.com/k-p4/ptm_interplay_scoring .
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
How many human proteoforms are there?
Aebersold, R., Agar, J. N., Amster, I. J., Baker, M. S., Bertozzi, C. R., Boja, E. S., Costello, C. E., Cravatt, B. F., Fenselau, C., Garcia, B. A., et al. (2018) · Nature Chemical Biology · doi:10.1038/nchembio.2576 · Cited by 907
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 29
- 10.1038/nmeth.2369 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1042/BCJ20200170 · DOI
- 10.1007/s13361-019-02350-z · DOI
- 10.1186/s13072-024-00536-8 · DOI
- 10.1186/s13072-018-0198-9 · DOI
- 10.1080/15592294.2018.1475979 · DOI
- 10.1074/mcp.M114.046441 · DOI
- 10.1002/pmic.201300438 · DOI
- 10.1021/acs.jproteome.6b00414 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1021/pr050266a · DOI
- 10.1074/mcp.M900238-MCP200 · DOI
- 10.1021/acs.jproteome.1c00894 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/pmic.201400569 · DOI
- 10.1002/pmic.201700442 · DOI
- 10.1074/mcp.O113.036335 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ymeth.2020.01.012 · DOI
- 10.1093/nar/gkx696 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1073/pnas.1205707109 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tibs.2018.02.004 · DOI
- 10.1021/pr200740a · DOI
- 10.15252/embj.201490834 · DOI
- 10.1038/s41598-020-74939-4 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ajo.2009.11.011 · DOI
- 10.1021/acs.jproteome.5b01164 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.celrep.2019.12.060 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.molcel.2021.10.008 · DOI
- 10.1186/s13287-015-0131-0 · DOI
- 10.7554/eLife.82596 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jbc.2024.107527 · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Poncha, K. F., Paparella, A. T., & Young, N. L.
- Affiliations
- Baylor College of Medicine (US)
- Corresponding author
- Young, Nicolas L.
- Venue
- Journal of Proteome Research
- Publisher
- openRxiv
- Published
- 2024-11-18
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1765-1777
- ISSN
- 1535-3893 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC12903780
- OpenAlex
- W4408031160
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 0.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Proteome Research (publishedVersion)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- Digital Commons-TMC (Texas Medical Center) (submittedVersion)
- PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- Howard Hughes Medical Institute (GT16569)
- National Institutes of Health (1r01ag085751-01)
- National Institute on Aging (R01 AG085751, R01AG074540, P01AG066606)
- National Cancer Institute (R01CA193235, R01CA276663)
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM139295)
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS136375)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Cancer-related gene regulation
- Keywords
- post-translational modification, PTM crosstalk, histone code, histone H3 modifications, aging, mouse organs, chromatin regulation
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