Molecular Recognition Features (MoRFs) in three domains of life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intrinsically disordered proteins and protein regions offer numerous advantages in the context of protein–protein interactions when compared to the structured proteins and domains. These advantages include ability to interact with multiple partners, to fold into different conformations when bound to different partners, and to undergo disorder-to-order transitions concomitant with their functional activity. Molecular recognition features (MoRFs) are widespread elements located in disordered regions that undergo disorder-to-order transition upon binding to their protein partners. We characterize abundance, composition, and functions of MoRFs and their association with the disordered regions across 868 species spread across Eukaryota, Bacteria and Archaea. We found that although disorder is substantially elevated in Eukaryota, MoRFs have similar abundance and amino acid composition across the three domains of life. The abundance of MoRFs is highly correlated with the amount of intrinsic disorder in Bacteria and Archaea but only modestly correlated in Eukaryota. Proteins with MoRFs have significantly more disorder and MoRFs are present in many disordered regions, with Eukaryota having more MoRF-free disordered regions. MoRF-containing proteins are enriched in the ribosome, nucleus, nucleolus and microtubule and are involved in translation, protein transport, protein folding, and interactions with DNAs. Our insights into the nature and function of MoRFs enhance our understanding of the mechanisms underlying the disorder-to-order transition and protein–protein recognition and interactions. The fMoRFpred method that we used to annotate MoRFs is available at http://biomine.ece.ualberta.ca/fMoRFpred/.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".