Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

InterPro:IPR045296|PANTHER:PTN000471017 is not part of respiratory chain but regulates #5557

Open
hattrill opened this issue Nov 29, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@hattrill
Copy link

hattrill commented Nov 29, 2024

InterPro:IPR045296
PANTHER:PTN000471017 ; GROWTH HORMONE-INDUCIBLE SOLUBLE PROTEIN-RELATED (PTHR21024)

This corresponds to ETF Regulatory Factor 1 (ETFRF1). Its interaction with the electron transferring flavoprotein (EFT) complex results in the removal of the flavin from the ETFA subunit and stops the transfer of electrons into the respiratory chain. PMID:27499296, PMID:36266680

I think that 'respiratory electron transport chain' is incorrect. 'negative regulation of oxidative phosphorylation' is a more accurate term as ETF is thought of as part of regulating oxidative phosphorylation.

(For PAINT, I have just added this to FBgn0040985, replacing 'negative regulation of cellular respiration'....might be a while coming, but could be used for propagation when it does)

@sarach06
Copy link

Hi,
Thank you very much for this. I have updated the term and added the latest reference to the abstract. These changes will be available in the next InterPro release (104.0).
Best regards,
Sara

@ValWood
Copy link
Contributor

ValWood commented Dec 13, 2024

'negative regulation of oxidative phosphorylation' is a more accurate term as ETF is thought of as part of oxidative phosphorylation.

should that be NOT part of?

@hattrill
Copy link
Author

@ValWood Do you mean that it should be higher up such as 'negative regulation of cellular respiration'?

@ValWood
Copy link
Contributor

ValWood commented Dec 16, 2024

it was a pedantic comment but I just edited 'part of' to regulating to make it clearer that these are distinct.
What you have changed to seems correct to me.
v

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants