The WWWH of remote homolog detection: The state of the art

29Citations
Citations of this article
36Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The detection of remote homolog pairs of proteins using computational methods is a pivotal problem in structural bioinformatics, aiming to compute protein folds on the basis of information in the database of known structures. In the last 25 years, several methods have been developed to tackle this problem, based on different approaches including sequence-sequence alignments and/or structure comparison. In this article, we will briefly discuss When, Why, Where and How (WWWH) to perform remote homology search, reviewing some of the most widely adopted computational approaches. The specific aim is highlighting the basic criteria implemented by different research groups and commenting on the status of the art as well as on still-open questions. © The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press.

References Powered by Scopus

Basic local alignment search tool

78929Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Improved tools for biological sequence comparison.

10196Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A general method applicable to the search for similarities in the amino acid sequence of two proteins

8641Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

A comprehensive review and comparison of different computational methods for protein remote homology detection

111Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

From laptop to benchtop to bedside:Structure-based drug design on protein targets

79Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Computational and theoretical methods for protein folding

69Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fariselli, P., Rossi, I., Capriotti, E., & Casadio, R. (2007). The WWWH of remote homolog detection: The state of the art. Briefings in Bioinformatics, 8(2), 78–87. https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbl032

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 17

52%

Researcher 12

36%

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

9%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

3%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22

67%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 6

18%

Computer Science 4

12%

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceut... 1

3%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
References: 2

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free