Rv0530A Still unknown · low auto-curated

H37Rv Rv0530A · MTBC0 - · 53 aa · 622121–622282 H37Rv (-) · RefSeq YP_007409181.1

Genomic neighbourhood (genome browser)

Open in full genome browser →

This gene (outlined) in its genomic context; arrows are neighbouring genes coloured by verdict. Click any gene to navigate. Pan and zoom in the full browser.

Annotation: from legacy to revised

Legacy (H37Rv / Mycobrowser)hypothetical protein
MTBC0 PGAP re-annotation—
Revised (this work)Conserved hypothetical protein; no recognised domain. Function unknown.
Functional category (TubercuList)conserved hypotheticals

Auto-curated: this verdict and function were generated by rules from PGAP + Pfam + Foldseek and have not been hand-reviewed.

Annotated on the H37Rv protein: this gene has no 1:1 ancestral MTBC0 anchor (PE/PPE, paralogue, IS element, or otherwise unanchored CDS).

In the literature (TB corpus sweep) named only in full text

No TB publication mentions this locus tag in its title or abstract (sweep of a ~330k-abstract PubMed TB corpus). A full-text search does however find 2 paper(s) naming this gene in their body text — see the full-text field below. The gene remains dark on function, but it is not unmentioned, and this page no longer claims that it is.

Named in the body of 2 paper(s), though in no title or abstract. Searched as Rv0530A, Mb0543A, MMAR_0877, MSMEG_0976, MAB_3971 in Europe PMC full text (2026-09-08).

A full-text hit means the gene is NAMED in the body of a paper — very often in a genome-wide supplementary table — not that it is characterised. This field exists to retract an absence claim, never to assert a function. Read the hits before concluding anything. Coverage limit (P52.4, measured 2026-09-30): this search only sees articles whose full text Europe PMC holds, about 8-13 % of the TB literature published before 2005, 21 % for 2005-2009, 40 % for 2010-2014 and 66 % since 2020, so the absence of a hit says little about older mentions. A hit whose full text is not open access is counted in n_unverifiable, not listed: the API cannot read it, so it is neither a proof of mention nor a proof of absence.

Second-source check (tbmonitor): 0 paper(s) against 0 for the PubMed sweep — no mention in either source.

Second-source check (P43.6): tbmonitor finds 0 paper(s) naming this locus tag, the PubMed sweep 0 — no mention in either source. Neither source is complete: across the 210 fiches whose source verdict is dark, 3 are seen only by tbmonitor and 4 only by PubMed, which is why a 'no mention in the literature' statement is never made on a single source here. (The site's own counter reports 209: Rv2438A carries a curated function and is recalled to family_assigned at ingest by the verdict/function coherence guard, so it leaves the dark tally without leaving this cross-check.) A count above zero says the gene has been NAMED in a paper, not that its molecular function is known: Rv2660c carries 38 papers as the latency antigen of the multistage vaccine H56 (Ag85B + ESAT-6 + Rv2660c, Aagaard et al., Nat Med 2011, PMID 21258338) and is still dark on function. Counts are shown side by side and never merged.

Scope of the sweep: What was actually swept: the H37Rv locus tag and the ortholog locus tags (M. bovis Mb…, M. marinum MMAR_…, M. smegmatis MSMEG_…, M. leprae ML…, M. abscessus MAB_…), plus the gene name where one exists. NOT swept: protein and enzyme names, including family shorthands such as Ldt(Mt4) or VapC28, and their orthographic variants. An absent locus-tag mention is therefore evidence about the TAG, and only indirect evidence about the protein (P18.14).

An antigen status or a virulence phenotype is NOT a molecular function: the verdict stays unchanged. This layer adds the missing context, it does not requalify the gene. This distinguishes a gene that is dark because nobody has looked from one that is dark despite having been studied. Source: PubMed (whole), MULTI-ALIAS sweep of title+abstract: the H37Rv locus tag AND every ortholog identifier (M. bovis Mb…, M. marinum MMAR_…, M. smegmatis MSMEG_…, M. leprae ML…, M. abscessus MAB_…), each hit VERIFIED against the abstract text (word-boundary regex). phase73, 2026-07-13.

Intrinsic disorder (sequence + structure) partially disordered

Predicted disorder19% of residues (metapredict) · mean AlphaFold pLDDT 80.9

carries a substantial disordered region (0/53 residues); disorder is a property, not a function

A property (biophysics), not a function. No LLPS/condensate claim is made from disorder alone. Verdict unchanged. Source: metapredict v3 (Emenecker/Holehouse) per-residue disorder + AlphaFold mean pLDDT (annotation_mtbc P16.13).

Why this gene is still unknown (classification, not failure) MICRO-ORF

The detectors cannot speak here. WALL OF MEASURABILITY. Below ~65 aa a protein cannot carry a full Pfam-A domain, profile-profile search has too little sequence to build a deep profile, and a TM-score around 0.6 against any small fold is ordinary rather than significant. Pocket detection is blind too: on PROVEN enzymes, only 1 of 26 under 200 aa reaches the P2Rank confidence threshold. The absence of a functional call here measures the detectors, not the protein.

Detector state length 53 aa · Pfam domain: none · confident AlphaFold model: yes · significant structural hits: 0 · pocket detection: blind (protein below the detector's power) · MS: detected
Existence vs functionMS-detected: the protein EXISTS, only its function is unknown -- two distinct statements.
What would settle itBench, or a detector built for short proteins. Existence is often provable (MS); function is not inferable in silico with today's tools.

Read with care. A statement about what can be MEASURED on this gene today, not a claim that it has no function, and revisable: a gene enters or leaves this class as the layers change. It stays counted among the dark. phase117_hard_residue.py (P8-résidu-dur), 2026-08-10.

Genomic-neighbour overlap (structural caveat) antiparallel · 2 % of gene

NeighbourRv0530 (Rv0530, + strand)
Overlap4 bp, 2 % of this gene's length

antiparallel overlap: this gene may inherit essentiality/conservation signal from its neighbour through shared TA sites or promoter constraint, without any protein of its own being produced (cf. Rv2438A/nadE) Signals attributed to this gene (Tn-seq essentiality via shared TA sites, conservation via promoter constraint) should be cross-checked against the neighbour before being read as its own. P20.1, derived from GFF3 gene coordinates, 2026-08-03.

Binding-pocket screen (P2Rank, geometric prediction) detector blind at this length

Pockets found0
Model length screened53 aa

Read with care. This protein (53 aa) is below the size where this detector has meaningful power: on proven enzymes, only 3.8% (1/26) under 200 aa reach this layer's P2Rank confidence threshold of best_probability >= 0.70, versus 60.5% (75/124) above it (P16.3b calibration, negative control EsxA/EsxB-scale panel). Both figures are recall AT 0.70, which is also the best separation this detector reaches on that panel (Youden J = 0.416) and whose false-positive rate above 200 aa is 18.9% (81.1% specificity); the looser 0.50 that appears elsewhere in this repository would raise recall above 200 aa to 74.2% and drop specificity to 64.9%. A negative or weak pocket result here should NOT be read as evidence against a ligand-binding role -- the test essentially has no power at this length, not that the protein lacks a site. The same holds in the other direction, and that half was missing here: a STRONG score at this length is not a result either. The same calibration panel does carry that other arm below 200 aa, and the two do not separate: the 3.8% above is matched by 6.6% (5/76) of proteins annotated as non-catalytic clearing 0.70 (Fisher p = 1.00; 15.4% against 11.8% at 0.50, p = 0.73). At this length the score therefore carries no measured information in either direction -- which is a stronger statement than untested power, and the reason a strong score here is not a result. P16.3e, calibration phase72b_pocket_calibration.py, 2026-08-03.

CRISPRi vulnerability

Vulnerability index 1.07 (95% CI -0.21 to 2.98). A more negative index = more vulnerable to knockdown (better drug-target quality); indicative threshold VI ≤ -6 = highly vulnerable.

Quantitative CRISPRi knockdown, graded (finer than binary Tn-seq essentiality). Source: CRISPRi vulnerability index (Bosch 2021, pebble.rockefeller.edu).

Caveat on this estimate. Bosch et al. flag this gene's vulnerability estimate as NOT certain (their own confidence call, not a p-value threshold): the fit may rest on too few informative sgRNAs (n_guides=None) or an unstable dose-response curve; guide-level data to check the titration range directly (str_span) could not be matched to this locus. Atlas-wide, VI for 'certain=False' genes has a median near zero (no vulnerability signal) versus -6.76 for 'certain=True' genes -- do not cite this VI as a standalone vulnerability claim without checking `certain` first.

Orthologues (reciprocal best hits across mycobacteria)

M. bovis Mb0543A · 100.0% identity
M. marinum MMAR_0877 · 81.3% identity
M. smegmatis MSMEG_0976 · 69.4% identity
M. orygis RJtmp_000558 · 100.0% identity
M. abscessus MAB_3971 · 54.5% identity

Reciprocal-best-hit orthologues (DIAMOND) against the Mycobrowser reference proteomes. A missing species is informative: e.g. a gene absent from M. leprae was likely lost in its reductive genome evolution. Locus tags link to Mycobrowser.

Curated reference (UniProt)

UniProt V5QPR5 TrEMBL · unreviewed · Evidence at protein level
UniProt nameConserved protein

As checked on 2026-09-23, UniProt listed this protein as Conserved protein; the revised annotation above goes beyond that record. UniProt may have been recurated since: check the live entry.

Functional vocabulary (eggNOG-mapper, orthology transfer)

Orthologous group2B11T

Orthology-based transfer (eggNOG 5.0.2, diamond). EC/KO/GO/CAZy are computed annotations, not manual curation; cross-check against the primary literature before treating a specific reaction as established.

Outgroup conservation (beyond the MTBC) Mycobacteriaceae

Genus-wide presence (~53 non-MTBC Mycobacterium) present in 53/53 (100%) · mean identity 85.3% · 4/4 closest MTBAP relatives
conserved across the genus (present in 53/53 non-MTBC Mycobacterium genomes, incl. distant relatives) — an ancient core gene predating the genus radiation
Phylostratum (deepest detected homolog) MTBC-specific → Mycobacterium → Mycobacteriaceae → Corynebacteriales → Actinomycetia → Bacteria
detected in 1/13 non-Mycobacterium reference genomes (down to Mycobacteriaceae) · mean identity 63.3%
detected in the sister family Mycobacteriaceae (M. abscessus) but not in the broader Corynebacteriales — a Mycobacteriaceae-restricted gene (single-genome rung: interpret with care)

Two orthogonal outgroup signals. M. canettii (the immediate outgroup) gives a deep-divergence dN/dS (a low value confirms a constrained, real gene; shown as confident only at ≥8 substitutions, else flagged low-power). Genus-wide presence/absence (tblastn vs assembled non-MTBC genomes) places the gene on the ancient-core ↔ MTBC-specific axis: a gene absent even from the closest MTBAP relatives is a candidate MTBC-specific innovation (possible host-adaptation factor, to confirm by synteny). The phylostratum extends that axis outside the genus (tblastn vs 13 reference genomes spanning Mycobacteriaceae → Corynebacteriales → Actinomycetia → outside the phylum): it is the deepest clade in which a homolog is still detected, i.e. a proxy for gene age. Read it with the null model in mind: a shallow (young) stratum can also reflect homology-detection failure for short or fast-evolving ORFs, so it is a descriptive axis, not a proof of novelty.

Essentiality (transposon mutagenesis)

DeJesus 2017 callNE · non-essential
What the call meansnon-essential
TA sites (Himar1) 4 in the ORF — 0 in the essential state, 0 growth-defect, 4 non-essential, 0 growth-advantage. Saturation 1.000, mean read count 321. A region of the protein devoid of TA sites is invisible to this assay: nothing can be inferred about it, in either direction.
3 of these 4 sites are exclusively this ORF's; Measured, not hypothetical: 1 of this ORF's 4 TA sites lies inside Rv0530 (1 site), leaving 3 sites that are exclusively its own. A transposon insertion cannot be assigned to one reading frame rather than the other, so the essentiality call rests on those 3 exclusive sites — too few to carry a call on its own.
CaveatStatistically thin call: only 4 TA (Himar1) sites in the whole ORF (atlas median 13; genes under 300 nt typically have very few). A DeJesus 2017 call built on so few independent observations is less robust than the same call on a longer gene, in either direction. Cross-check against the CRISPRi vulnerability index (independent of TA-site density) and, if this gene overlaps a neighbour (see Genomic-neighbour overlap section below), verify how many of its TA sites actually fall inside its own ORF. (P20.3)

Genome-wide Himar1 transposon essentiality in H37Rv (DeJesus 2017). An essential call (ES/ESD/GD) is strong, independent evidence that a "hypothetical" locus encodes a functional, selectively required gene — orthogonal to intra-species conservation.

Conditional fitness (RB-TnSeq, 95 conditions) carbon source

Lead: transposon mutants are specifically enriched under L-Asparagine (carbon-source) (RB-TnSeq log2=1.52, t=9.74), i.e. loss of the gene confers a fitness advantage there — candidate L-Asparagine-susceptibility/activation factor whose disruption is beneficial, to validate (a fitness phenotype is not a proven function).

ConditionGroupDirectionlog2 fitnesst
L-Asparagine carbon source mutant enriched (loss advantageous) 1.52 9.74

Randomly-barcoded transposon screen across 95 carbon/nitrogen sources, pH, stressors and antibiotics (1 condition-specific phenotype(s) for this gene). A conditional fitness phenotype is a context lead, not a proven function, and never changes the verdict here. Note the blind spot: RB-TnSeq cannot measure essential genes. Source: RB-TnSeq 95-condition barcoded transposon screen, Mtb (PLoS Biol 2026, doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3003529).

Proteomics (mass spectrometry) detected

MS detectiondetected in 7 of 16 independent MS datasets
Integrated abundance53.1 ppm · rank 1714/3519 (51.3th percentile)

Detection by mass spectrometry is direct, experimental evidence that the protein product exists — orthogonal to sequence conservation and to Tn-seq essentiality, and especially decisive for a "hypothetical" locus. Read the dataset count as abundance, not as replication. Measured across this atlas (3,491 detected proteins), the number of datasets a protein appears in tracks its abundance almost monotonically: median 1.2 ppm at 1 dataset of 16, 27 ppm at 10, 392 ppm at 15, 1,325 ppm at 16 — three orders of magnitude. A high count therefore says the protein is abundant more than it says several independent experiments confirmed it. What the count does establish, at any value, is that the product exists.

Predicted localisation (DeepTMHMM + lipobox)

Predictionpredicted membrane protein (1 TM helix)
DeepTMHMM classTM
TM helices (DeepTMHMM)1

Transmembrane topology and signal peptide from DeepTMHMM (deep-learning reference predictor); lipoproteins from a (myco)bacterial lipobox motif. A sequence-based prediction of subcellular context.

Physico-chemical properties (computed, ProtParam)

Length53 aa
Molecular weight6.1 kDa
Theoretical pI10.23
GRAVY-0.16 (hydrophilic)
Aliphatic index114.2
Aromaticity0.075
Instability index42.0 (unstable)

Computed from the ancestral MTBC0 sequence with the ExPASy ProtParam method (Biopython). Descriptive biophysical context: a positive GRAVY flags a hydrophobic (often membrane) protein, a high instability index (>40) predicts a short in-vitro half-life, an extreme pI hints at compartment or binding partner.

Domains (Pfam, hmmscan --cut_ga)

No Pfam-A domain above the gathering threshold (hmmscan --cut_ga scan completed).

3D structure (interactive — Mol*/pdbe-molstar)

No experimental structure is deposited for this gene: showing the AlphaFold DB predicted model (mean pLDDT 80.9, confident), coloured by per-residue confidence (dark blue = very high, orange/red = low — treat low-confidence regions as unreliable, especially termini and loops). Drag to rotate, scroll to zoom.

Genomic context (neighbours & predicted operon)

Upstream (5' on genome)Rv0530 (+ strand, -4 bp gap)
Downstream (3' on genome)Rv0531 (+ strand, 46 bp gap)

Neighbours from the H37Rv annotation (- strand). The operon is predicted by co-directional intergenic distance (same strand, gaps ≤50 bp) — a transcription-unit hypothesis, not a mapped TSS. For a "hypothetical", co-transcription with a characterised operon is a concrete functional lead (complements the STRING neighborhood channel below).

Published operon evidence (two independent sources)

Roback 2007 (logistic regression: distance + expression correlation, 474 microarrays) no multi-gene operon predicted (singleton)
REMap 2016 (RNA-seq coverage continuity, CDC1551, tag MT0553) expressed, no multi-gene operon (exponential phase, coverage 191.76)
expressed, no multi-gene operon (stationary phase, coverage 226.7) — agrees with the distance heuristic above

Two independent published operon maps, cited alongside the distance heuristic above: an association corroborating or contradicting the heuristic, never proof of shared function. REMap's RNA-seq coverage continuity is the most direct of the three signals; Roback's logistic regression and the intergenic-distance heuristic are statistical proxies.

Functional interaction network (STRING v12, guilt-by-association)

Explore full network →

Node colour = verdict, dashed = still uncharacterised; edge colour = evidence (green experimental, orange genomic-context, grey co-expression), width ∝ score. Click a partner to open its page; "Explore full network" to walk the graph.

Closest characterised functional partner: Rv0531 (membrane protein), medium confidence (score 668, all STRING channels except text-mining; the partner is chosen on its genomic-context evidence). Read this as a lead toward a shared pathway or operon, not as evidence of a physical complex: when this atlas co-folded 98 such context-only pairs, their predicted interfaces were no more confident than those of length-matched control pairs.

All 2 partner(s) at medium confidence are shown. None rests on an interaction measured in M. tuberculosis itself.

PartnerProductScoreNo text-miningChannels (≥400)
Rv0531 membrane protein 668 668 ctx neighborhood:645
Rv0792c transcriptional regulator 420 420 coexpression:420

STRING combines evidence channels (neighborhood, fusion, cooccurrence, coexpression, experimental, database, text-mining) into a 0–1000 score. The ctx badge marks edges carried by the genomic-context channels (conserved neighborhood, fusion, phylogenetic co-occurrence), which are independent of orthology and structure and the strongest signal for an unknown gene. The no text-mining column recomputes the score from data alone, so a link that does not depend on the literature is visible. Association is a function hypothesis, not proof: corroborate with the operon context and the primary literature before assigning a function.

Where the experimental evidence comes from, and why it matters here. STRING's experimental channel fuses interactions measured in M. tuberculosis with interactions measured in another organism and transferred to this pair by orthology. The two are not equivalent for this atlas, whose standing rule is that better studied elsewhere is not a function established in M. tuberculosis. Measured on the served network: of the 38 229 partner pairs shown across the atlas, 13 483 partner rows carry a non-zero experimental channel, and only 106 pairs rest on an interaction measured in M. tuberculosis itself — 0.3 % of the network. Those 106 are long-established complexes (ESX-1/ESAT-6, RNA polymerase with CarD and RbpA, the Pup–Mpa proteasome, gyrase, Emb, GarA with PknB and PknG, the Rel modules); no still-uncharacterised gene is among them. The reason is not a gap in this atlas but in the literature: there is almost no experimental interactome of this bacterium, IntAct holding 134 curated protein pairs for a ~4 000-gene proteome. A exp (transferred) badge is therefore a lead, never a measurement, and an absence of badge is not evidence that the pair does not interact.

Evidence

  • Annotation from H37Rv (no MTBC0 1:1 anchor; H37Rv protein used): hypothetical protein
  • (auto-curated by rules from PGAP + Pfam + Foldseek; not hand-reviewed)

Sources

  • Ancestral sequence & coordinates: Harrison LB et al. (2024), An imputed ancestral reference genome for the MTBC, doi:10.1101/2023.09.07.556366
  • Product annotation: NCBI PGAP on MTBC0; legacy from H37Rv NC_000962.3 (RefSeq YP_007409181.1)
  • Domains: Pfam-A via hmmscan --cut_ga — none above threshold
  • Sequence-level signal: ESM Atlas (EvolutionaryScale × BioHub) — exploratory
  • Controlled vocabulary: eggNOG-mapper 2.1.12 (Cantalapiedra et al. 2021, doi:10.1093/molbev/msab293), eggNOG 5.0 DB (Huerta-Cepas et al. 2019) — OG 2B11T
  • Curated reference: UniProt V5QPR5 (TrEMBL, unreviewed; Evidence at protein level)
  • Model confidence: ESMFold per-residue pLDDT (mean 70.2, confident)
  • Genome-wide structure: AlphaFold DB model (Jumper et al. 2021, doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2; Varadi et al. 2024, doi:10.1093/nar/gkad1011) searched vs PDB with Foldseek (mean pLDDT 80.9)
  • Interaction network: STRING v12.0 (Szklarczyk et al. 2023, doi:10.1093/nar/gkac1000), taxon 83332, CC-BY 4.0 — 2 functional partner(s); context anchor Rv0531
  • Essentiality: genome-wide transposon mutagenesis in H37Rv — DeJesus et al. 2017 (mBio, doi:10.1128/mBio.02133-16, CC BY)
  • Proteomics: integrated mass-spectrometry abundance from PaxDb 5.0 (Huang et al. 2023, doi:10.1016/j.mcpro.2023.100640), taxon 83332 — weighted average of 16 datasets, incl. Schubert et al. 2013 (doi:10.1016/j.chom.2013.04.008) and Albrethsen et al. 2013 (doi:10.1074/mcp.M112.018846)
  • Functional category: TubercuList scheme (Cole et al. 1998, doi:10.1038/31159), via Mycobrowser (Kapopoulou et al. 2011, doi:10.1016/j.tube.2010.09.006)
  • Orthologues: reciprocal best hits (DIAMOND, Buchfink et al. 2021, doi:10.1038/s41592-021-01101-x) against Mycobrowser release 5 reference proteomes
  • Genomic context / operon: H37Rv annotation; operon predicted by co-directional intergenic distance (Salgado et al. 2000, doi:10.1073/pnas.030539397)
  • Physico-chemical properties: ExPASy ProtParam method via Biopython (Gasteiger et al. 2005), computed from the MTBC0 sequence
  • Predicted localisation: DeepTMHMM (Hallgren et al. 2022, doi:10.1101/2022.04.08.487609) for transmembrane topology and signal peptide
  • Primary literature: none located yet; annotation rests on the domain/homology sources above.

Ancestral MTBC0 protein sequence

>H37Rv|Rv0530A|
MLYLLLVLILATLIYLGWRAARAQMNRPKTRVIGPDDDPEFLRRLGHGDNNRS