PLoS Computational BiologyBioinformaticsPeer-reviewed journal article
Why do eukaryotic proteins contain more intrinsically disordered regions?
Walter BasileiD, Marco SalvatoreiD, Claudio BassotiD, Arne ElofssoniD
Abstract
Intrinsic disorder is much more abundant in eukaryotic than in prokaryotic proteins. However, the reason behind this is unclear. It has been proposed that the disordered regions are functionally important for regulation in eukaryotes, but it has also been proposed that the difference is a result of lower selective pressure in eukaryotes. Almost all studies intrinsic disorder is predicted from the amino acid sequence of a protein. Therefore, there should exist an underlying difference in the amino acid distributions between eukaryotic and prokaryotic proteins causing the predicted difference in intrinsic disorder. To obtain a better understanding of why eukaryotic proteins contain more intrinsically disordered regions we compare proteins from complete eukaryotic and prokaryotic proteomes.\n\nHere, we show that the difference in intrinsic disorder origin from differences in the linker regions. Eukaryotic proteins have more extended linker regions and, in particular, the eukaryotic linker regions are more disordered. The average eukaryotic protein is about 500 residues long; it contains 250 residues in linker regions, of which 80 are disordered. In comparison, prokaryotic proteins are about 350 residues long and only have 100-110 residues in linker regions, and less than 10 of these are intrinsically disordered.\n\nFurther, we show that there is no systematic increase in the frequency of disorder-promoting residues in eukaryotic linker regions. Instead, the difference in frequency of only three amino acids seems to lie behind the difference. The most significant difference is that eukaryotic linkers contain about 9% serine, while prokaryotic linkers have roughly 6.5%. Eukaryotic linkers also contain about 2% more proline and 2-3% fewer isoleucine residues. The reason why primarily these amino acids vary in frequency is not apparent, but it cannot be excluded that the difference is serine is related to the increased need for regulation through phosphorylation and that the proline difference is related to increase of eukaryotic specific repeats.
- Citations
- 113
- FWCI
- 4.14
- Field percentile
- top 4%
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Exploring Potential Signals of Selection for Disordered Residues in Naturally Occurring Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic Proteins
Arup Panda, Tamir Tuller·Genomics Proteomics & BioinformaticsPeer-reviewed·Oct 1, 2020
- Exon Elongation Added Intrinsically Disordered Regions to the Encoded Proteins and Facilitated the Emergence of the Last Eukaryotic Common Ancestor
Satoshi Fukuchi, Tamotsu Noguchi, … Keiichi Homma·Molecular Biology and EvolutionPeer-reviewed·Dec 16, 2022
- Location dependence of protein intrinsic disorder in Drosophila melanogaster
Hassan-Sibroe A. Daanaa, Shigehiro Kuraku, … Kuniaki Saito·bioRxiv·Jul 3, 2026
- Dynamical buffering of reconfiguration dynamics in intrinsically disordered proteins
Miloš T. Ivanović, Andrea Holla, … Robert B. Best·JACS AuPeer-reviewed·Mar 2, 2026
- Quantitative proteome-based guidelines for intrinsic disorder characterization
Michael Vincent, Mark Whidden, Santiago Schnell·Biophysical ChemistryPeer-reviewed·Jun 1, 2016
- Effective concentrations enforced by intrinsically disordered linkers are governed by polymer physics
C. S. Sorensen, M. Kjaergaard·bioRxiv·Mar 14, 2019