Generated by analyze_cilium_evidence.py. All numbers are fetched live from the IntAct and UniProt REST APIs at run time; nothing here is hard-coded.
Human ABRACL carries GO:0005929 cilium (IEA, GO_REF:0000044), mapped from the UniProt subcellular-location line Cell projection, cilium {ECO:0000305|PubMed:37759737}. That publication is an expression study of mouse and cat embryonic telencephalon which does not assay ciliary localisation; it attributes the claim to a high-throughput proteomics study. This asks what that primary evidence is, and whether a ciliary role is plausible for the family.
| Interactions recorded for Q9P1F3 | 5 |
|---|---|
| Distinct detection methods | 1 |
| Distinct source publications | 1 |
| Partner | Detection method | Interaction type | Publication |
|---|---|---|---|
| CNTRL | proximity-dependent biotin identification | proximity | 26638075 (pubmed) |
| CNTRL | proximity-dependent biotin identification | proximity | 26638075 (pubmed) |
| DCTN1 | proximity-dependent biotin identification | proximity | 26638075 (pubmed) |
| RPGRIP1L | proximity-dependent biotin identification | proximity | 26638075 (pubmed) |
| SASS6 | proximity-dependent biotin identification | proximity | 26638075 (pubmed) |
Detection methods observed: proximity-dependent biotin identification.
Counts are UniProtKB entries (reviewed + unreviewed) cross-referenced to each PANTHER family in each proteome. Angiosperms build no cilium, basal body or centriole at any life stage, and neither does Dictyostelium discoideum - which is also the donor organism for ABRACL's IBA annotation. A family whose conserved function is ciliary should score zero in all four.
| PANTHER | Family | Role | Homo sapiens | Danio rerio | Chlamydomonas reinhardtii | Arabidopsis thaliana | Oryza sativa subsp. japonica | Zea mays | Dictyostelium discoideum |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PTHR46334 | Costars / ABRACL | test | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
| PTHR44117 | IFT88 | cilium-core control | 7 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| PTHR12969 | IFT52 | cilium-core control | 2 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| PTHR20870 | BBS1 | cilium-core control | 11 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| PTHR46090 | ARL13B | cilium-core control | 18 | 13 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| PTHR11588 | tubulin beta | universal control | 122 | 54 | 11 | 23 | 22 | 98 | 4 |
Part 1 shows the entire physical-interaction record for ABRACL is one proximity-labelling experiment. BioID biotinylates whatever comes within roughly 10 nm of the bait during hours of labelling, so a prey list is a neighbourhood, not a localisation call; and three of the four baits here (SASS6, CNTRL, DCTN1) are centriolar or dynactin proteins rather than ciliary ones. Part 2 shows the family is retained in four proteomes that build no cilium at all, while four cilium-core families are absent from every one of them and the universal control is present in all. The reciprocal observation points the same way: no PTHR46334 member is cross-referenced in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, the most heavily ciliated proteome in the panel, where all four cilium-core controls are present. Costars distribution therefore does not track cilium presence in either direction. That single absence is a cross-reference count rather than a homology search, so it is reported as an observation and no weight is placed on it alone.
Neither part proves ABRACL is absent from human cilia; a lineage-specific ciliary role would not show up in a phyletic comparison, and BioID hits are sometimes real. What they establish is narrower and sufficient for curation: there is no direct localisation evidence behind the cilium annotation, and the conserved function of the family cannot be ciliary.