Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 269

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

Comparing function and structure between entire proteomes

Open access
Liu, Jinfeng, Rost, Burkhard·2001·Protein Science

Abstract

More than 30 organisms have been sequenced entirely. Here, we applied a variety of simple bioinformatics tools to analyze 29 proteomes for representatives from all three kingdoms: eukaryotes, prokaryotes, and archaebacteria. We confirmed that eukaryotes have relatively more long proteins than prokaryotes and archaes, and that the overall amino acid composition is similar among the three. We predicted that ∼15%–30% of all proteins contained transmembrane helices. We could not find a correlation between the content of membrane proteins and the complexity of the organism. In particular, we did not find significantly higher percentages of helical membrane proteins in eukaryotes than in prokaryotes or archae. However, we found more proteins with seven transmembrane helices in eukaryotes and more with six and 12 transmembrane helices in prokaryotes. We found twice as many coiled‐coil proteins in eukaryotes (10%) as in prokaryotes and archaes (4%–5%), and we predicted ∼15%–25% of all proteins to be secreted by most eukaryotes and prokaryotes. Every tenth protein had no known homolog in current databases, and 30%–40% of the proteins fell into structural families with >100 members. A classification by cellular function verified that eukaryotes have a higher proportion of proteins for communication with the environment. Finally, we found at least one homolog of experimentally known structure for ∼20%–45% of all proteins; the regions with structural homology covered 20%–30% of all residues. These numbers may or may not suggest that there are 1200–2600 folds in the universe of protein structures. All predictions are available at http://cubic.bioc.columbia.edu/genomes.

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 · 10.1110/ps.10101

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 269

Metadata

Authors
Liu, J., & Rost, B.
Venue
Protein Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2001-10
Volume
10
Issue
10
Pages
1970-1979
ISSN
  • 0961-8368 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-896X
OpenAlex
W2159136327
Cited by
269
References
6
FWCI
5.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Comparing function and structure between entire proteomes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1110/ps.10101
The paper
Liu, J., & Rost, B. (2001). Comparing function and structure between entire proteomes. Protein Science. https://doi.org/10.1110/ps.10101

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.