Intrinsic Disorder in the Protein Data Bank
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Protein Data Bank (PDB) is the preeminent source of protein structural information. PDB contains over 32,500 experimentally determined 3-D structures solved using X-ray crystallography or nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Intrinsically disordered regions fail to form a fixed 3-D structure under physiological conditions. In this study, we compare the amino-acid sequences of proteins whose structures are determined by X-ray crystallography with the corresponding sequences from the Swiss-Prot database. The analyzed dataset includes 16,370 structures, which represent 18,101 PDB chains and 5,434 different proteins from 910 different organisms (2,793 eukaryotic, 2,109 bacterial, 288 viral, and 244 archaeal). In this dataset, on average, each Swiss-Prot protein is represented by 7 PDB chains with 76% of the crystallized regions being represented by more than one structure. Intriguingly, the complete sequences of only approximately 7% of proteins are observed in the corresponding PDB structures, and only approximately 25% of the total dataset have >95% of their lengths observed in the corresponding PDB structures. This suggests that the vast majority of PDB proteins is shorter than their corresponding Swiss-Prot sequences and/or contain numerous residues, which are not observed in maps of electron density. To determine the prevalence of disordered regions in PDB, the residues in the Swiss-Prot sequences were grouped into four general categories, "Observed" (which correspond to structured regions), "Not observed" (regions with missing electron density, potentially disordered), "Uncharacterized," and "Ambiguous," depending on their appearance in the corresponding PDB entries. This non-redundant set of residues can be viewed as a 'fragment' or empirical domain database that contains a set of experimentally determined structured regions or domains and a set of experimentally verified disordered regions or domains. We studied the propensities and properties of residues in these four categories and analyzed their relations to the predictions of disorder using several algorithms. "Non-observed," "Ambiguous," and "Uncharacterized" regions were shown to possess the amino acid compositional biases typical of intrinsically disordered proteins. The application of four different disorder predictors (PONDR(R) VL-XT, VL3-BA, VSL1P, and IUPred) revealed that the vast majority of residues in the "Observed" dataset are ordered, and that the "Not observed" regions are mostly disordered. The "Uncharacterized" regions possess some tendency toward order, whereas the predictions for the short "Ambiguous" regions are really ambiguous. Long "Ambiguous" regions (>70 amino acid residues) are mostly predicted to be ordered, suggesting that they are likely to be "wobbly" domains. Overall, we showed that completely ordered proteins are not highly abundant in PDB and many PDB sequences have disordered regions. In fact, in the analyzed dataset approximately 10% of the PDB proteins contain regions of consecutive missing or ambiguous residues longer than 30 amino-acids and approximately 40% of the proteins possess short regions (> or =10 and < 30 amino-acid long) of missing and ambiguous residues.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.027 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".