Back

Characterization of cross-family conserved fragments

Chen, X.; Tian, P.

2026-10-06 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.09.28.754887 bioRxiv
Show abstract

In a companion study, we introduced ProDive and used it to identify 318,289 high-confidence cross-family segment correspondences across all 25,545 Pfam families. Here we characterize the pervasiveness and biophysical context of the resulting mapped fragment resource. Graph-based community analysis shows that segment reuse is broadly distributed across the protein family universe, with thousands of mostly small modules rather than concentration in a small number of family pairs. Comparison between Pfam families and de novo designed proteins reveals an approximately 2.1-fold enrichment of cross-family segment correspondences relative to the Pfam-Pfam background. Mapped fragments are strongly enriched in helix-dominant secondary structures with intermediate solvent exposure, occupy a narrowed sequence-context entropy regime, and show a significant shift toward lower fragment-associated contact order relative to random control windows, directly supporting a folding-compatible local structural regime. Matched annotation analyses show depletion from known domain-based interaction interfaces and mild depletion from strict DisProt disorder. Direct Start2Fold/HDX and{varphi} -value comparisons are limited in scale but connect the same fragment class to folding-related protection: stability annotations support local structural stabilization that may facilitate folding, whereas folding annotations and transition-state enrichments provide more specific evidence for folding initiation or pathway involvement. Together, these results support a physical-constraint interpretation of local structural conservation, in which reusable compact fragments contribute prominently to local stability and folding-relevant local structure, with folding initiation supported in specific subsets rather than as an exclusive mechanism.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.