The Difference in Structural States between Canonical Proteins and Their Isoforms Established by Proteome-Wide Bioinformatics Analysis.

Clicks: 100
ID: 281801
2022
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #79 of 99 articles by views in Biomolecules

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Alternative splicing is an important means of generating the protein diversity necessary for cellular functions. Hence, there is a growing interest in assessing the structural and functional impact of alternative protein isoforms. Typically, experimental studies are used to determine the structures of the canonical proteins ignoring the other isoforms. Therefore, there is still a large gap between abundant sequence information and meager structural data on these isoforms. During the last decade, significant progress has been achieved in the development of bioinformatics tools for structural and functional annotations of proteins. Moreover, the appearance of the AlphaFold program opened up the possibility to model a large number of high-confidence structures of the isoforms. In this study, using state-of-the-art tools, we performed in silico analysis of 58 eukaryotic proteomes. The evaluated structural states included structured domains, intrinsically disordered regions, aggregation-prone regions, and tandem repeats. Among other things, we found that the isoforms have fewer signal peptides, transmembrane regions, or tandem repeat regions in comparison with their canonical counterparts. This could change protein function and/or cellular localization. The AlphaFold modeling demonstrated that frequently isoforms, having differences with the canonical sequences, still can fold in similar structures though with significant structural rearrangements which can lead to changes of their functions. Based on the modeling, we suggested classification of the structural differences between canonical proteins and isoforms. Altogether, we can conclude that a majority of isoforms, similarly to the canonical proteins are under selective pressure for the functional roles.
Reference Key
osmanli2022the Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Osmanli, Zarifa; Falgarone, Theo; Samadova, Turkan; Aldrian, Gudrun; Leclercq, Jeremy; Shahmuradov, Ilham; Kajava, Andrey V
Journal Biomolecules
Year 2022
DOI
10.3390/biom12111610
URL
Keywords
protein structure large-scale analysis alphafold canonical protein isoform

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.