{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02702702702702703, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.67, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Structural Proteomics: The Relentless Pursuit of Protein Shape

In an editorial in the Journal of Proteome Research , structural biologist Raymond Stevens and proteomicist John Yates lament the confusion of terms surrounding their work. “Structural Genomics,” they say, is restricted mostly to the United States. Europe and other countries use “Structural Proteomics” to acknowledge a broader functional perspective to their work. Whatever you call it, structural ‘omics efforts have had an indelible impact, and not just on structure databases. Their technological output has altered the way structural biology specifically—and protein chemistry in general—is done.