4.7 Review

AlphaFold and Implications for Intrinsically Disordered Proteins

Journal

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
Volume 433, Issue 20, Pages -

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2021.167208

Keywords

AlphaFold; intrinsically disordered proteins; cautionary notes

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Accurate predictions of protein structures using AlphaFold have made significant progress. Most protein sequences in the human proteome have been structurally annotated, with over 30% of regions being disordered.
Accurate predictions of the three-dimensional structures of proteins from their amino acid sequences have come of age. AlphaFold, a deep learning-based approach to protein structure prediction, shows remarkable success in independent assessments of prediction accuracy. A significant epoch in structural bioinformatics was the structural annotation of over 98% of protein sequences in the human proteome. Interestingly, many predictions feature regions of very low confidence, and these regions largely overlap with intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs). That over 30% of regions within the proteome are disordered is congruent with estimates that have been made over the past two decades, as intense efforts have been undertaken to generalize the structure-function paradigm to include the importance of conformational heterogeneity and dynamics. With structural annotations from AlphaFold in hand, there is the temptation to draw inferences regarding the structures of IDRs and their interactomes. Here, we offer a cautionary note regarding the misinterpretations that might ensue and highlight efforts that provide concrete understanding of sequence-ensemble-function relationships of IDRs. This perspective is intended to emphasize the importance of IDRs in sequence-function relationships (SERs) and to highlight how one might go about extracting quantitative SERs to make sense of how IDRs function. (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available