Rv1572c Still unknown · low auto-curated · to review

H37Rv Rv1572c · MTBC0 · 34 aa · 1779194–1779298 H37Rv (-) · RefSeq

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)Conserved hypothetical protein
MTBC0 PGAP re-annotation—
Functional category (TubercuList)insertion seqs and phages

Curation note: Added P16.5d: Mycobrowser-annotated gene absent from RefSeq NC_000962.3 (the atlas' original 3906-CDS reference). Foundation record from the Mycobrowser release + translated H37Rv sequence; heavy enrichment layers (structure, orthology, conservation, interaction) pending.

Auto-curated: this verdict and function were generated by rules from PGAP + Pfam + Foldseek and have not been hand-reviewed (flagged for human review).

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 8 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 8 paper(s), though in no title or abstract. Searched as Rv1572c 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.

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 34 aa · Pfam domain: none · confident AlphaFold model: no · significant structural hits: 0 · pocket detection: blind (protein below the detector's power) · MS: not detected
Existence vs functionNot MS-detected: neither existence nor function is settled here. A proteomics negative is weak evidence for short, hydrophobic or low-abundance proteins.
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.

CRISPRi vulnerability

Vulnerability index 0.68 (95% CI -0.37 to 2.45). 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, and here that call has a mechanical cause visible in the library itself: every guide targeting this gene is >=21 nt (str_span=0.315 on a 0-1 scale, near the genome floor), and guide repression strength saturates from 21 nt on -- so the library never sampled a partial knockdown for this gene, only the near-maximal repression plateau. The dose-response fit (and this VI) is therefore essentially unconstrained by data, not merely uncertain -- a limitation of the CRISPRi library design for the non-essential class (Bosch et al. 2021), not a defect in this specific measurement. n_guides=8 is descriptive only and does not predict this. Do not cite this VI as a standalone vulnerability claim.

Legacy record & comparison (Mycobrowser)

Mycobrowser functionUnknown

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.

Curated reference (UniProt)

UniProt O06618 TrEMBL · unreviewed
UniProt nameUncharacterized protein

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

pN/pS 0.52 · quasi-invariant (3 sites), pN/pS underpowered
Polymorphic sites (≥ 0.1% of strains) 1 synonymous, 2 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.

Essentiality (transposon mutagenesis)

DeJesus 2017 callUncertain · uncertain
What the call meansuncertain (short or TA-poor ORF): no call possible
TA sites (Himar1) 1 in the ORF — 0 in the essential state, 0 growth-defect, 1 non-essential, 0 growth-advantage. Saturation 1.000, mean read count 81. A region of the protein devoid of TA sites is invisible to this assay: nothing can be inferred about it, in either direction.
All 1 sites lie in this ORF alone (no overlapping CDS shares any), so the call is attributable to this gene.
CaveatStatistically thin call: only 1 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.

Proteomics (mass spectrometry) not detected

Not detected in the mass-spectrometry datasets integrated by PaxDb. This is not evidence of absence, and this atlas can say which bias dominates, because it measured it on its own 482 undetected proteins. Size is the main factor: undetected proteins have a median length of 145 aa against 295 aa for detected ones, and 25.3 % of them are shorter than 100 aa against 6.0 %. Predicted localisation matters far less than usually assumed: detection rates are 89.3 % for globular, 84.9 % for transmembrane, 88.0 % for lipoproteins and 77.8 % for signal-peptide proteins — so a short protein is under-sampled whatever its predicted compartment, and hydrophobicity alone is a weak excuse. Condition-specific expression and few tryptic peptides (PE/PPE repeats) add to this.

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)

Length34 aa
Molecular weight4.0 kDa
Theoretical pI5.75
GRAVY-1.591 (hydrophilic)
Aliphatic index42.9
Aromaticity0.029
Instability index46.9 (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 69.5, low), 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.

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

Regulated by (8 TF) Rv0232 (activates) · Rv0324 (represses) · trcR (activates) · Rv2034 (represses) · devR (activates) · lrpA (activates) · kstR2 (represses) · ethR (activates)

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.

All 11 partner(s) at medium confidence are shown. None rests on an interaction measured in M. tuberculosis itself.

PartnerProductScoreNo text-miningChannels (≥400)
Rv1573 dark phage protein 844 570 ctx neighborhood:569 textmining:652
Rv1756c Putative transposase; Rv1756c, (MTCY28.22c), len: 328 aa. Putative Transposase subunit for IS6110. Identical to many other M. tuberculosis I 870 47 textmining:870
Rv0796 Putative transposase for insertion sequence element IS6110; Involved in the transposition of the insertion sequence. 682 47 textmining:680
Rv1755c plcD Rv1755c, (MT1799, MTCY28.21c), len: 280 aa. Probable plcD, phospholipase C 4 (fragment) (see citations below),highly similar to C-terminus o 627 47 textmining:625
Rv1524 glycosyltransferase 434 47 textmining:431
Rv3351c hypothetical protein 433 45 textmining:431
Rv1584c phage protein 656 44 textmining:655
Rv3179 hypothetical protein 439 44 textmining:438
Rv1585c phage protein 870 43 textmining:870
Rv1192 hypothetical protein 436 42 textmining:436
Rv1759c wag22 PE-PGRS family protein Wag22 511 41 textmining:511

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.

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 )
  • Domains: Pfam-A via hmmscan --cut_ga — none above threshold
  • Sequence-level signal: ESM Atlas (EvolutionaryScale × BioHub) — exploratory
  • Curated reference: UniProt O06618 (TrEMBL, unreviewed)
  • Intra-MTBC selection: pN/pS and disruption from SPDI variants of 142 601 MTBC strains (this work, local collection vs H37Rv NC_000962.3)
  • Interaction network: STRING v12.0 (Szklarczyk et al. 2023, doi:10.1093/nar/gkac1000), taxon 83332, CC-BY 4.0 — 11 functional partner(s)
  • Essentiality: genome-wide transposon mutagenesis in H37Rv — DeJesus et al. 2017 (mBio, doi:10.1128/mBio.02133-16, CC BY)
  • 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)
  • 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

>|Rv1572c|Rv1572c
VECSSAVHGQPRTNTFHHHEKLLRHNDEDNHDDP