Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33948708›Full record

ReviewCurrent genetics2021

Yeast proteins do not practice social distancing as species hybridize.

Caroline M Berger, Christian R Landry

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current genetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Caroline M BergerDépartement de Biologie, Faculté des sciences et de génie, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, G1V0A6, Canada. caroline.berger.1@ulaval.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7973-8611
Christian R LandryDépartement de Biologie, Faculté des sciences et de génie, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, G1V0A6, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the current COVID-19 pandemic, we all realized how important interactions are. Interactions are everywhere. At the cellular level, protein interactions play a key role and their ensemble, also called interactome, is often referred as the basic building blocks of life. Given its importance, the maintenance of the integrity of the interactome is a real challenge in the cell. Many events during evolution can disrupt interactomes and potentially result in different characteristics for the organisms. However, the molecular underpinnings of changes in interactions at the cellular level are still largely unexplored. Among the perturbations, hybridization puts in contact two different interactomes, which may lead to many changes in the protein interaction network of the hybrid, including gains and losses of interactions. We recently investigated the fate of the interactomes after hybridization between yeast species using a comparative proteomics approach. A large-scale conservation of the interactions was observed in hybrids, but we also noticed the presence of proteostasis-related changes. This suggests that, despite a general robustness, small differences may accumulate in hybrids and perturb their protein physiology. Here, we summarize our work with a broader perspective on the importance of interactions.

Indexed as

Hybridization, GeneticProtein Interaction MapsAnimalsFungal ProteinsProteomicsSaccharomycesSaccharomyces cerevisiaeFungal ProteinsHybridizationInteractomeProtein–protein interactionYeast

Identifiers

PMID33948708
PMCPMC8096128

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.