2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2019.09.056
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Revealing favorable and unfavorable residues in cooperative positions in protease cleavage sites

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 32 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…of P1 may be recognized by additional subsites (S2, S3 and S1’, S2’, respectively). Although this model implies that the interactions between the individual substrate residues and their corresponding subsites are relatively independent of one another, it is evident that constraints in size, geometry or charge may lead to interactions such that certain sequence combinations are favorable, others unfavorable (Ng, Pike, and Boyd 2009; Qi et al 2019) (Fig. 1A).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…of P1 may be recognized by additional subsites (S2, S3 and S1’, S2’, respectively). Although this model implies that the interactions between the individual substrate residues and their corresponding subsites are relatively independent of one another, it is evident that constraints in size, geometry or charge may lead to interactions such that certain sequence combinations are favorable, others unfavorable (Ng, Pike, and Boyd 2009; Qi et al 2019) (Fig. 1A).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%