Can we please retire the headline trend of "The Unreasonable ___ of ____ "
The Unreasonable Redundancy of Nature's Protein Folds
21–30 of 63 posts
Re: The Unreasonable Redundancy of Nature's Protein Folds
#22gosh the scrolling on that site was so jumpy!
Agree... There should be some penalty to sites that want to show off their reports only to people with high end devices...
Re: The Unreasonable Redundancy of Nature's Protein Folds
#23Can we please retire the headline trend of "The Unreasonable ___ of ____ "
At some point someone will analyze this pattern and post an article named "The Unreasonable effectiveness of the 'The Unreasonable X of Y' template".
Re: The Unreasonable Redundancy of Nature's Protein Folds
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amino acid (sequence) defines the folds. And really? Just any random sequence gets you a new fold. I mean, it won't be very useful if you pick a random one, but it'll work and be a new one. I think this is just an artifact of natural selection basing new proteins on existing ones, not an actual useful ("rational" if you can call natural selection rational) selection limit. I don't think that if you designed proteins…
A random sequence may not fold at all! I seem to remember a paper that tried this, creating a bunch of random proteins, and checking how much structure they had - I think they were helical bundles, but don't quote me. The nice thing about stable folds, is that 'nearby' sequences in sequence space - as in, point mutations - are the same fold. If each sequence had a completely different fold, then mutation would be muc…
This reminds me of structural studies in proteins encoded by de novo genes in eukaryotes. They are usually either intrinsically disordered or adopt a molten-globule-like state.
Re: The Unreasonable Redundancy of Nature's Protein Folds
#25My PhD thesis addressed a similar question. I did a survey of sub-domain sized fragments shared between different protein folds. It turns out that there are plenty, even among folds considered evolutionarily distant.
Re: The Unreasonable Redundancy of Nature's Protein Folds
#26Can we please retire the headline trend of "The Unreasonable ___ of ____ "
At some point someone will analyze this pattern and post an article named "The Unreasonable effectiveness of the 'The Unreasonable X of Y' template".
Everything old is new again! We've had "Go To Statement Considered Harmful" Considered Harmful [1].
Now it's the Unreasonable Effectiveness of "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of X".
It seems like "X is All You Need" is All You Need.
[1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20090320002214/http://www.ecn.pu...
Re: The Unreasonable Redundancy of Nature's Protein Folds
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
A random sequence may not fold at all! I seem to remember a paper that tried this, creating a bunch of random proteins, and checking how much structure they had - I think they were helical bundles, but don't quote me. The nice thing about stable folds, is that 'nearby' sequences in sequence space - as in, point mutations - are the same fold. If each sequence had a completely different fold, then mutation would be muc…
This reminds me of structural studies in proteins encoded by de novo genes in eukaryotes. They are usually either intrinsically disordered or adopt a molten-globule-like state.
Yes, I was watching a video about that the other day - the 'dark proteome' or the 'ghost proteome' or similar.
Re: The Unreasonable Redundancy of Nature's Protein Folds
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
At some point someone will analyze this pattern and post an article named "The Unreasonable effectiveness of the 'The Unreasonable X of Y' template".
Everything old is new again! We've had "Go To Statement Considered Harmful" Considered Harmful [1]. Now it's the Unreasonable Effectiveness of "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of X". It seems like "X is All You Need" is All You Need. [1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20090320002214/http://www.ecn.pu...
All you need is the unreasonable effectiveness of ... Symmetry.
Re: The Unreasonable Redundancy of Nature's Protein Folds
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everything old is new again! We've had "Go To Statement Considered Harmful" Considered Harmful [1]. Now it's the Unreasonable Effectiveness of "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of X". It seems like "X is All You Need" is All You Need. [1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20090320002214/http://www.ecn.pu...
All you need is the unreasonable effectiveness of ... Symmetry.
Heh, on my watchlist - ""The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Group Theory" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XsXRUsNEC4
Re: The Unreasonable Redundancy of Nature's Protein Folds
#30Can we please retire the headline trend of "The Unreasonable ___ of ____ "
Competing with "x is all you need"