Forum:Purely analytic or in silico manuscripts that have significantly improved biological understanding
1
1
Entering edit mode
10 months ago
LauferVA 4.2k

Hey Biostars,

So, there is a manuscript called, "Five amino acids in three HLA proteins explain most of the association between MHC and seropositive rheumatoid arthritis."

Essentially, by exploiting huge amounts of data, the authors of that manuscript were able to leverage LD information to pinpoint the variants that actually produce the association of the MHC region in RA, rather than simply being passenger mutations.

The analyses took into account haplotype structure and several other layers of analysis, and ultimately pinpoint 3 variants (in HLA-A, -B, and -DRB1) all mapping to the peptide binding grooves of the respective molecules.

This purely in silico paper therefore represented a significant advance in biological understanding that wet lab techniques had not been successful in framing. Because the amino acids bear such resemblance, the manuscript has the effect of almost writing the next (very specific) hypothesis for the reader.


I was just curious as to any similar papers that you really enjoyed, and that sort of transcended experimental techniques to produce better understanding.

Anyone have examples? Have fun!

dry-lab • 834 views
ADD COMMENT
0
Entering edit mode

Most investigators at NLM work in a similar fashion (besides Dr. Koonin) who was mentioned below. There are other members from that group : https://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/focus/Evolutionary.html

Overall directory of investigators at NLM:

https://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/index.html

ADD REPLY
1
Entering edit mode
10 months ago
Mensur Dlakic ★ 27k

At least half of early papers by Eugene Koonin, who now has >1000 papers, fulfill the criterion you proposed. In his first 5-10 years after coming to NIH, just about all his papers were predictive. Can't remember that he was wrong more than once or twice. Even today his lab makes super insightful predictions (he has a massive CRISPR bibliography), but the difference is that now he often collaborates with experimental scientists. That means that both the prediction and the proof come in the same paper, so that wouldn't be what you asked about.

ADD COMMENT
0
Entering edit mode

Mensur Dlakic this guy's career is crazy. thanks so much for your great reply!!

ADD REPLY

Login before adding your answer.

Traffic: 1397 users visited in the last hour
Help About
FAQ
Access RSS
API
Stats

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.

Powered by the version 2.3.6