Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 780

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

Protein–protein interactions define specificity in signal transduction

Open access
Pawson, Tony, Nash, Piers·2000·Genes & Development

Abstract

Virtually every aspect of cellular function within a metazoan organism, including proliferative status, metabolism, gene expression, cytoskeletal organization, and indeed the cell’s very survival, is dependent on external signaling molecules, either in the form of soluble hormones or proteins anchored to the surface of an adjacent cell or the extracellular matrix (ECM). These factors exert their effects either by binding receptors displayed on the surface of the cell or, in the case of compounds such as steroids, by traversing the plasma membrane and directly engaging intracellular receptors. In addition, these external signals can be linked to intrinsic cues that regulate events such as polarity and asymmetric cell division, and that monitor the molecular composition of the cell, and therefore determine whether suitable conditions prevail for cell growth and division. Over the last two decades, we have achieved considerable understanding of the mechanisms by which signals are conveyed from receptors at the plasma membrane to their targets in the cytoplasm and nucleus. At heart, this is a problem of molecular recognition. Hormones must bind selectively to their receptors and these in turn must interact with specific cytoplasmic targets. To understand signal transduction in a general sense, it is important to know whether different biochemical pathways use related molecular devices to control cellular behavior. To understand specificity in signaling, we need to know how receptors interact with particular targets and how the proteins of one pathway can be insulated from related signaling components. At the same time, it is important to learn how distinct signaling pathways communicate with one another, since the entire cell must ultimately function as a single unit whose different elements respond in an organized fashion to external signals. A cell in the body will be exposed to many different stimuli, which it must integrate into a coherent response. Furthermore, although a rather large fraction of genes within nucleated cells appear to function in the processes of signal transduction and cellular organization (Plowman et al. 1999), it is still remarkable that only a few thousand gene products can control the sophisticated behaviors of many different cell types. This immediately suggests that signaling proteins must act in a combinatorial fashion, since there are insufficient proteins for each to have a single biological role. For example, there are billions of neurons in the human brain, each of which must project its axon to the appropriate target, let alone undertake the complex biochemical events associated with neurotransmission and synaptic plasticity. Clearly, the signaling molecules that function in the process of axon guidance must act in a combinatorial way to generate the extreme complexity of the human nervous system. Here we will address some of the underlying biochemical mechanisms through which specificity is generated during signal transduction, and pursue the means by which signaling molecules may act in combination to generate complex biological responses.

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 · 10.1101/gad.14.9.1027

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

Show all 11 references

Cited by

See all 780

Metadata

Authors
Pawson, T., & Nash, P.
Venue
Genes & Development
Published
2000-05-01
Volume
14
Issue
9
Pages
1027-1047
ISSN
  • 0890-9369 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-5477
OpenAlex
W2110845720
Cited by
780
References
11
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
diamond

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: Protein–protein interactions define specificity in signal transduction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1101/gad.14.9.1027
The paper
Pawson, T., & Nash, P. (2000). Protein–protein interactions define specificity in signal transduction. Genes & Development. https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.14.9.1027

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.