The intrinsic substrate specificity of the human tyrosine kinome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Phosphorylation of proteins on tyrosine (Tyr) residues evolved in metazoan organisms as a mechanism of coordinating tissue growth1. Multicellular eukaryotes typically have more than 50 distinct protein Tyr kinases that catalyse the phosphorylation of thousands of Tyr residues throughout the proteome1–3. How a given Tyr kinase can phosphorylate a specific subset of proteins at unique Tyr sites is only partially understood4–7. Here we used combinatorial peptide arrays to profile the substrate sequence specificity of all human Tyr kinases. Globally, the Tyr kinases demonstrate considerable diversity in optimal patterns of residues surrounding the site of phosphorylation, revealing the functional organization of the human Tyr kinome by substrate motif preference. Using this information, Tyr kinases that are most compatible with phosphorylating any Tyr site can be identified. Analysis of mass spectrometry phosphoproteomic datasets using this compendium of kinase specificities accurately identifies specific Tyr kinases that are dysregulated in cells after stimulation with growth factors, treatment with anti-cancer drugs or expression of oncogenic variants. Furthermore, the topology of known Tyr signalling networks naturally emerged from a comparison of the sequence specificities of the Tyr kinases and the SH2 phosphotyrosine (pTyr)-binding domains. Finally we show that the intrinsic substrate specificity of Tyr kinases has remained fundamentally unchanged from worms to humans, suggesting that the fidelity between Tyr kinases and their protein substrate sequences has been maintained across hundreds of millions of years of evolution.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".