A paradigm shift is needed in proteomics: 'Structure determines function' should be replaced by 'binding determines function'

Journal of Molecular Recognition

Volumn 15, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 349-351

  Van Regenmortel, Marc H V ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE STRASBOURG   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMALS; DATABASES, PROTEIN; HUMANS; MOLECULAR STRUCTURE; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEINS; PROTEOMICS; STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP;

EID: 0036873031     PISSN: 09523499     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmr.603     Document Type: Editorial

References (23)

1. Amzel LM. 1998. Structure-based drug design. Curr. Opin. Biotech. 9: 366-369.
2. Day YS, Baird CL, Rich RL, Myszka DG. 2002. Direct comparison of binding equilibrium, thermodynamic and rate constants determined by surface and solution based biophysical methods. Protein Sci. 11: 1017-1025.
3. DeLano WL. 2002. Unraveling hot spots in binding interfaces: progress and challenges. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 12: 14-20.
4. Demchenko AP. 2001. Recognition between flexible protein molecules: induced and assisted folding. J. Mol. Recognit. 14: 42-61.
5. Fields S. 1997. The future is function. Nat. Genet. 15: 325-327.
6. Ito T, Tashiro K, Muta S, Ozawa T, Chiba T, Nishizawa M, Yamamoto K, Kuhara S, Sakaki Y. 2000. Toward a protein-protein interaction map of the budding yeast: a comprehensive system to examine two-hybrid interactions in all possible combinations between the yeast proteins. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 97: 1143-1147.
7. Janin J. 1997. Angstroms and calories. Structure 5: 473-479.
8. Jin L, Wells JA. 1996. Mutational analysis of antibody binding sites. In Structure of Antigens, Vol. 3, Van Regenmortel MHV (ed.). CRC Press: New York; 21-36.
9. Myszka DG. 1999. Survey of the 1998 optical biosensor literature. J. Mol. Recognit. 12: 390-408.
10. Natsume T, Nakayama H, Isobe T. 2001. BIA-MS-MS: biomolecular interaction analysis for functional proteomics. Trends Biotechnol. 19: 528-533.
11. Nedelkov D, Nelson RW. 2001. Biomolecular interaction analysis mass spectrometry. Proteomics 1: 1441-1446.
12. Patthy L. 1999. Protein Evolution. Blackwell Science: Oxford.
13. Rain JC, Selig L, De Reuse H, Battalia V, Reverdy C, Simon S, Lenzen G, Petel F, Wojcik J, Schächter V, Chemana Y, Labigne A, Legrain P. (2001). The protein-protein interaction map of Helicobacter pylori. Nature 409: 211-215.
14. Rich RL, Myszka DG. 2000. Survey of the 1999 surface plasmon resonance biosensor literature. J. Mol. Recognit. 13: 388-407.
15. Rich RL, Myszka DG. 2001. Survey of the year 2000 commercial optical biosensor literature. J. Mol. Recognit. 14: 273-294.
16. Salmon WC. 1998. Causality and Explanation. Oxford University Press: New York.
17. Tamames J, Ouzounis C, Sander C, Valencia A. 1996. Genomes with distinct function composition. FEBS Lett. 389: 96-101.
18. Van Regenmortel MHV. 2000. Are there two distinct research strategies for developing biologically active molecules: rational design and empirical selection? J. Mol. Recognit. 13: 1-4.
19. Van Regenmortel MHV. 2001. Analysing structure-function relationships with biosensors. Cell. Mol Life Sci. 58: 794-800.
20. Van Regenmortel MHV. 2002a. Pitfalls of reductionism in immunology. In Promises and Limits of Reductionism in the Biomedical Sciences, Van Regenmortel MHV, Hull DL (eds). John Wiley: Chichester.
21. Van Regenmortel MHV. 2002b. Reductionism and the search for structure-function relationships in antibody molecules. J. Mol. Recognit. 15: 240-247.
22. Wilson WD. 2002. Analysing biomolecular interactions. Science 295: 2103-2104.
23. Zeder-Lutz G, Benito A, Van Regenmortel MHV. 1999. Active concentration measurements of recombinant biomolecules using biosensor technology. J. Mol. Recognit. 12: 300-309.