Protein unfolding rates correlate as strongly as folding rates with native structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the folding rates of proteins have been studied extensively, both experimentally and theoretically, and many native state topological parameters have been proposed to correlate with or predict these rates, unfolding rates have received much less attention. Moreover, unfolding rates have generally been thought either to not relate to native topology in the same manner as folding rates, perhaps depending on different topological parameters, or to be more difficult to predict. Using a dataset of 108 proteins including two-state and multistate folders, we find that both unfolding and folding rates correlate strongly, and comparably well, with well-established measures of native topology, the absolute contact order and the long range order, with correlation coefficient values of 0.75 or higher. In addition, compared to folding rates, the absolute values of unfolding rates vary more strongly with native topology, have a larger range of values, and correlate better with thermodynamic stability. Similar trends are observed for subsets of different protein structural classes. Taken together, these results suggest that choosing a scaffold for protein engineering may require a compromise between a simple topology that will fold sufficiently quickly but also unfold quickly, and a complex topology that will unfold slowly and hence have kinetic stability, but fold slowly. These observations, together with the established role of kinetic stability in determining resistance to thermal and chemical denaturation as well as proteases, have important implications for understanding fundamental aspects of protein unfolding and folding and for protein engineering and design.
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 | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".