↓ Skip to main content

A PDB-wide, evolution-based assessment of protein-protein interfaces

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Molecular and Cell Biology, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A PDB-wide, evolution-based assessment of protein-protein interfaces
Published in
BMC Molecular and Cell Biology, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12900-014-0022-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kumaran Baskaran, Jose M Duarte, Nikhil Biyani, Spencer Bliven, Guido Capitani

Abstract

BackgroundThanks to the growth in sequence and structure databases, more than 50 million sequences are now available in UniProt and 100,000 structures in the PDB. Rich information about protein¿protein interfaces can be obtained by a comprehensive study of protein contacts in the PDB, their sequence conservation and geometric features.ResultsAn automated computational pipeline was developed to run our Evolutionary Protein¿Protein Interface Classifier (EPPIC) software on the entire PDB and store the results in a relational database, currently containing > 800,000 interfaces. This allows the analysis of interface data on a PDB-wide scale. Two large benchmark datasets of biological interfaces and crystal contacts, each containing about 3000 entries, were automatically generated based on criteria thought to be strong indicators of interface type. The BioMany set of biological interfaces includes NMR dimers solved as crystal structures and interfaces that are preserved across diverse crystal forms, as catalogued by the Protein Common Interface Database (ProtCID) from Xu and Dunbrack. The second dataset, XtalMany, is derived from interfaces that would lead to infinite assemblies and are therefore crystal contacts. BioMany and XtalMany were used to benchmark the EPPIC approach. The performance of EPPIC was also compared to classifications from the Protein Interfaces, Surfaces, and Assemblies (PISA) program on a PDB-wide scale, finding that the two approaches give the same call in about 85% of PDB interfaces. By comparing our safest predictions to the PDB author annotations, we provide a lower-bound estimate of the error rate of biological unit annotations in the PDB. Additionally, we developed a PyMOL plugin for direct download and easy visualization of EPPIC interfaces for any PDB entry. Both the datasets and the PyMOL plugin are available at http://www.eppic-web.org/ewui/\#downloads.ConclusionsOur computational pipeline allows us to analyze protein¿protein contacts and their sequence conservation across the entire PDB. Two new benchmark datasets are provided, which are over an order of magnitude larger than existing manually curated ones. These tools enable the comprehensive study of several aspects of protein¿protein contacts in the PDB and represent a basis for future, even larger scale studies of protein¿protein interactions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Italy 2 2%
Switzerland 1 1%
China 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 78 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 19%
Student > Master 15 18%
Researcher 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 9 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 31 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 26%
Chemistry 4 5%
Computer Science 3 4%
Physics and Astronomy 3 4%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 10 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 November 2014.
All research outputs
#6,410,375
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#196
of 1,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,076
of 271,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#4
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,233 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 271,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.