Rv0810c Still unknown · low

H37Rv Rv0810c · MTBC0 - · 60 aa · 904905–905087 H37Rv (-) · RefSeq NP_215325.1

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; DUF domain(s) DUF3073. Function unknown.
Functional category (TubercuList)conserved hypotheticals

Curation note: 2026-08-18 (hand review, feedback from the dedicated deep-dive project mtbc/Rv0810c). Eight independent computational strategies (sequence motif, profile-profile search on two databases, structural fold search, electrostatic-patch analysis, MSA-based relative-constraint mapping, controlled homo-oligomerisation modelling, and embedding-similarity search against 6.8 billion sequences in the ESM Atlas) all converge on the same negative: no assignable fold, binding site, or functional neighbour. Verdict deliberately LEFT AT 'dark': the gene is genuinely translated (11/16 proteomic datasets), under strong purifying selection, and DUF3073 is retained without a single confirmed loss across 260 well-supported Actinomycetia genera, yet no function is inferable with current tools -- this fiche's own disorder-call caution (possible metapredict over-call vs. AlphaFold pLDDT) is resolved by the dedicated project: residue-resolved analysis shows a genuine bipartite architecture, a rigid conserved module (residues ~1-33, mean pLDDT 91.9) followed by an extended, acidic, intrinsically disordered tail (residues ~34-60) -- so the disorder is real but confined to the tail, not an artefact and not a whole-protein property. Full dossier, code and derived data: https://github.com/cguyeux/deciphering-tuberculosis-with-ai/tree/main/Rv0810c. Submission update, 2026-08-26: desk-rejected by the Journal of Bacteriology (2026-08-19, editorial-fit rationale, no external review) and resubmitted the same week to Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics (Wiley), In Screening as of 2026-08-26.

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 11 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 11 paper(s), though in no title or abstract. Searched as Rv0810c, Mb0833c, ML2204, MMAR_4879, MSMEG_5797, MAB_0729c in Europe PMC full text (2026-10-02).

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) highly disordered

Predicted disorder100% of residues (metapredict) · mean AlphaFold pLDDT 77.0
Disordered regions1 IDR(s), longest 60 aa [0-60]

sequence-based disorder is high but AlphaFold folds it confidently (pLDDT>=70): treat the disorder call with caution (possible metapredict over-call)

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 60 aa · Pfam domain: yes · 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.

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

Pockets found0
Model length screened60 aa

Read with care. This protein (60 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 -11.98 (95% CI -15.41 to -8.60). 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, supplementary Table S2 'mmc3.xlsx', bulk import via Europe PMC -- supersedes the per-gene pebble.rockefeller.edu scrape of phase46_crispri_vulnerability.py).

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). Its guide library did sample a range of repression strengths (str_span=0.698 on a 0-1 scale, thanks to at least one guide <=18 nt; n_guides=23 descriptive only), so the dose-response fit is not starved of titration the way most 'not certain' genes are -- the uncertainty here is the authors' own confidence call on the fit, not a design limitation of the guide library. Do not cite this VI as a standalone vulnerability claim without checking `certain` first.

Legacy record & comparison (Mycobrowser)

Mycobrowser functionFunction unknown

The legacy Mycobrowser record is shown for verification. Mycobrowser is no longer maintained; its EC numbers predate recent nomenclature revisions, so a class change usually reflects re-numbering, not a conflict.

Orthologues (reciprocal best hits across mycobacteria)

M. bovis Mb0833c · 100.0% identity
M. leprae ML2204 · 77.8% identity
M. marinum MMAR_4879 · 75.0% identity
M. smegmatis MSMEG_5797 · 75.4% identity
M. orygis RJtmp_000856 · 100.0% identity
M. abscessus MAB_0729c · 65.6% 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 I6XWB9 TrEMBL · unreviewed · Predicted
UniProt nameDUF3073 domain-containing protein

Functional vocabulary (eggNOG-mapper, orthology transfer)

COG category S Function unknown
eggNOG descriptionProtein of unknown function (DUF3073)
Orthologous group2EGRW

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.

Conservation & selection (intra-MTBC, 142 601 strains, snapshot of 2026-09-29)

pN/pS 0.0 · quasi-invariant (1 site), pN/pS underpowered
Polymorphic sites (≥ 0.1% of strains) 1 synonymous, 0 missense, 0 nonsense, 0 frameshift

pN/pS from segregating SNPs (singletons removed) normalised by possible sites. Low pN/pS = purifying selection (a strong signal that a "hypothetical" is a real, constrained gene). A high pN/pS is ambiguous: relaxed constraint or positive selection (drug resistance, antigenic variation) inflate it; e.g. rpoB/katG/pncA score high here for resistance, not loss of function. A clonal disruption (one allele over a clade) suggests lineage pseudogenisation; a convergent one (many independent alleles) is typical of resistance loss-of-function.

Outgroup conservation (beyond the MTBC) Actinomycetia

M. canettii dN/dS (deep-divergence selection) 0.0 (low power) · 1 consensus substitution(s)
low power (1 canettii-consensus substitution(s)); present in M. canettii but dN/dS not reliable
Limitation: dN/dS mixes fixed canettii-H37Rv divergence with intra-canettii polymorphism, and is not polarised (the per-gene repolarisation is not viable: 79 % of the consensus SPDI lie outside the polarised table).
Genus-wide presence (~53 non-MTBC Mycobacterium) present in 53/53 (100%) · mean identity 96.2% · 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 10/13 non-Mycobacterium reference genomes (down to Actinomycetia) · mean identity 77.8%
detected across the class Actinomycetia (beyond Corynebacteriales) but not outside the phylum — an Actinobacteria-level ancient gene

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) essential

DeJesus 2017 callES · essential
What the call meansessential: insertions absent across the whole ORF
TA sites (Himar1) 5 in the ORF — 4 in the essential state, 0 growth-defect, 0 non-essential, 1 growth-advantage. Saturation 0.200, mean read count 197. A region of the protein devoid of TA sites is invisible to this assay: nothing can be inferred about it, in either direction.
All 5 sites lie in this ORF alone (no overlapping CDS shares any), so the call is attributable to this gene.
CaveatRead with some caution: only 5 TA (Himar1) sites in the whole ORF (atlas median 13). The DeJesus 2017 call rests on fewer independent observations than for a longer gene. If this gene overlaps a neighbour (see Genomic-neighbour overlap section below), some of these 5 sites may fall inside the neighbour's ORF rather than its own, leaving even fewer truly informative sites than the raw count suggests. (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.

Chemical-genetic target & druggability (PROSPECT) hypomorph tool strain

This gene is part of the PROSPECT collection of TetON transcriptional-knockdown (hypomorph) strains of essential M. tuberculosis genes, built as a sensitised background for chemical-genetic mechanism-of-action deconvolution. Being in the panel means the gene is an essential / vulnerable target for which a validated knockdown tool strain exists.

Hypomorph strainRv0810c_DAS #1 (TetON promoter -)
Baseline knockdown fitness4.526 median doublings (across 1 screen pool(s)) — fewer doublings = stronger growth defect on knockdown
Used in target deconvolutionno (Excluded - not in all screening waves)

Panel membership reflects essentiality/vulnerability and the availability of a genetic tool, not a specific molecular function; it never changes the verdict here. Source: Bond AN et al., Nat Commun 2025;16:9673 (doi:10.1038/s41467-025-64662-x); PROSPECT chemical-genetic platform.

Proteomics (mass spectrometry) detected

MS detectiondetected in 11 of 16 independent MS datasets
Integrated abundance372.0 ppm · rank 538/3519 (84.7th 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) no export signal, no TM helix

Predictionno signal peptide, no TM helix (DeepTMHMM class GLOB)
DeepTMHMM classGLOB

A verified absence of signals, which is not a compartment. No Sec/Tat signal peptide, no transmembrane helix and no lipobox were found on this sequence. The predictor reports topology and export signals; it does not measure where the protein ends up, so this page draws no cytoplasmic conclusion from it. In M. tuberculosis that reservation is not theoretical: the 12 Esx paralogues of this atlas — EsxA/ESAT-6 and EsxB/CFP-10 among them, the best-established secreted proteins of the species — carry this very call, because substrates of the type VII (ESX) secretion system leave no recognisable signal. « Secreted » and « no signal peptide » are true together here.

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)

Length60 aa
Molecular weight6.9 kDa
Theoretical pI5.25
GRAVY-1.677 (hydrophilic)
Aliphatic index35.8
Aromaticity0.067
Instability index43.2 (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)

PfamAccessioni-EvalueResiduesDescription
DUF3073PF11273.14 7.2e-232–58 Protein of unknown function (DUF3073)

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

No experimental structure is deposited for this gene: showing the AlphaFold DB predicted model (mean pLDDT 77.0, 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)purM (+ strand, 85 bp gap)
Downstream (3' on genome)Rv0811c (- strand, 146 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 MT0831) expressed, no multi-gene operon (exponential phase, coverage 487.47)
expressed, no multi-gene operon (stationary phase, coverage 209.74) — 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.

Transcriptional regulation (signed TRN: ChIP-seq + TFOE)

Regulated by (1 TF) Rv1353c (represses)

Regulatory edges from the ISB signed transcriptional regulatory network (TF ChIP-seq binding, Minch 2015 + TF-overexpression response, Rustad 2014). An edge is regulatory evidence (binding and/or expression change), not necessarily direct. For a "hypothetical", membership in a known regulon (e.g. DosR dormancy, PhoP virulence) is a physiological-context lead, not a function.

Condition: Condition-blind by construction. These edges come from transcription-factor OVEREXPRESSION in a single laboratory condition, so a listed regulator is not a claim that it governs this gene in every circumstance. Measured counter-examples exist within this atlas (see Rv2516c, where the DosR regulon collapses under moxifloxacin while the gene itself rises). Read a regulator as 'capable of shifting this gene', and look for the condition before building a hypothesis on it.

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: Rv0811c (hypothetical protein), high confidence (score 755, 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)
Rv0811c hypothetical protein 755 755 ctx neighborhood:752
Rv0812 4-amino-4-deoxychorismate lyase 694 694 ctx neighborhood:693

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
  • Pfam (hmmscan --cut_ga): DUF3073 PF11273.14 (E=7e-23)
  • (initial automatic assignment: auto-curated by rules from PGAP + Pfam + Foldseek; superseded by hand review)

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 NP_215325.1)
  • Domains: Pfam-A via hmmscan --cut_ga — DUF3073 (PF11273.14)
  • 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 2EGRW
  • Curated reference: UniProt I6XWB9 (TrEMBL, unreviewed; Predicted)
  • Intra-MTBC selection: pN/pS and disruption from SPDI variants of 142 601 MTBC strains (this work, local collection vs H37Rv NC_000962.3)
  • Model confidence: ESMFold per-residue pLDDT (mean 61.7, low)
  • 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 Rv0811c
  • 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)
  • Transcriptional regulation: ISB signed TRN — TF ChIP-seq (Minch et al. 2015, doi:10.1038/ncomms6829) + TF overexpression (Rustad et al. 2014, doi:10.1186/gb-2014-15-11-502)
  • 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|Rv0810c|
MGRGRAKAKQTKVARELKYSSPQTDFQRLQRELSGTGTDRLDGDGPSDDDSWNDEDDWRR