Species | Target name | Source | Bibliographic reference |
---|---|---|---|
Aliivibrio fischeri | Transcriptional activator protein luxR | Starlite/ChEMBL | References |
Species | Potential target | Raw | Global | Species |
---|---|---|---|---|
Echinococcus multilocularis | potassium voltage gated channel subfamily H | 0.0082 | 0.8972 | 1 |
Leishmania major | cytochrome p450-like protein | 0.0027 | 0.1517 | 0.5 |
Echinococcus multilocularis | potassium voltage gated channel subfamily H | 0.0024 | 0.1028 | 0.1145 |
Mycobacterium tuberculosis | Possible transcriptional regulatory protein | 0.0079 | 0.8651 | 0.5 |
Brugia malayi | Voltage-gated potassium channel, EAG (KCNH1)-related. C. elegans egl-2 ortholog | 0.0024 | 0.1028 | 0.1145 |
Schistosoma mansoni | voltage-gated potassium channel | 0.0089 | 1 | 1 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | hypothetical protein | 0.0071 | 0.7495 | 0.8354 |
Mycobacterium ulcerans | hypothetical protein | 0.0079 | 0.8651 | 1 |
Trypanosoma cruzi | cytochrome P450, putative | 0.0027 | 0.1517 | 0.5 |
Echinococcus granulosus | potassium voltage gated channel subfamily H | 0.0082 | 0.8972 | 1 |
Mycobacterium tuberculosis | Possible nitrate/nitrite response transcriptional regulatory protein NarL | 0.0079 | 0.8651 | 0.5 |
Echinococcus multilocularis | voltage gated potassium channel | 0.0024 | 0.1028 | 0.1145 |
Echinococcus granulosus | voltage gated potassium channel | 0.0024 | 0.1028 | 0.1145 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | CYP4Cod1 | 0.0027 | 0.1517 | 0.1691 |
Mycobacterium ulcerans | two component transcriptional regulator | 0.0079 | 0.8651 | 1 |
Mycobacterium ulcerans | nitrate/nitrite response regulator protein NarL | 0.0079 | 0.8651 | 1 |
Schistosoma mansoni | voltage-gated potassium channel | 0.0024 | 0.1028 | 0.1028 |
Mycobacterium tuberculosis | Possible two component transcriptional regulatory protein (probably LuxR-family) | 0.0079 | 0.8651 | 0.5 |
Trypanosoma brucei | cytochrome P450, putative | 0.0027 | 0.1517 | 0.5 |
Mycobacterium tuberculosis | Probable transcriptional regulatory protein (LuxR-family) | 0.0079 | 0.8651 | 0.5 |
Mycobacterium tuberculosis | Probable transcriptional regulatory protein (probably LuxR/UhpA-family) | 0.0079 | 0.8651 | 0.5 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | cytochrome P450 family protein | 0.0027 | 0.1517 | 0.1691 |
Trichomonas vaginalis | voltage and ligand gated potassium channel, putative | 0.0076 | 0.8236 | 1 |
Schistosoma mansoni | voltage-gated potassium channel | 0.0024 | 0.1028 | 0.1028 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | hypothetical protein | 0.0024 | 0.1028 | 0.1145 |
Echinococcus granulosus | potassium voltage gated channel subfamily H | 0.0024 | 0.1028 | 0.1145 |
Brugia malayi | Cytochrome P450 family protein | 0.0027 | 0.1517 | 0.1691 |
Mycobacterium leprae | PROBABLE TRANSCRIPTIONAL REGULATORY PROTEIN | 0.0079 | 0.8651 | 0.5 |
Brugia malayi | Cytochrome P450 family protein | 0.0027 | 0.1517 | 0.1691 |
Brugia malayi | Voltage-gated potassium channel, HERG (KCNH2)-related. C. elegans unc-103 ortholog | 0.0082 | 0.8972 | 1 |
Trichomonas vaginalis | voltage and ligand gated potassium channel, putative | 0.0076 | 0.8236 | 1 |
Mycobacterium ulcerans | two component transcriptional regulatory protein DevR | 0.0079 | 0.8651 | 1 |
Mycobacterium ulcerans | putative regulatory protein | 0.0079 | 0.8651 | 1 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | hypothetical protein | 0.0019 | 0.0444 | 0.0495 |
Trypanosoma cruzi | cytochrome P450, putative | 0.0027 | 0.1517 | 0.5 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | cytochrome P450 family protein | 0.0027 | 0.1517 | 0.1691 |
Loa Loa (eye worm) | voltage and ligand gated potassium channel | 0.0082 | 0.8972 | 1 |
Mycobacterium tuberculosis | Probable transcriptional regulatory protein | 0.0079 | 0.8651 | 0.5 |
Activity type | Activity value | Assay description | Source | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|
IC50 (binding) | = 6.5 uM | Inhibition of LuxR-dependent Vibrio fischeri quorum sensing assessed as reduction in 3-oxo-hexanoyihomoserine-induced bioluminescence | ChEMBL. | 18625553 |
Many chemical entities in TDR Targets come from high-throughput screenings with whole cells or tissue samples, and not all assayed compounds have been tested against a single a single target protein, probably because they get ruled out during screening process. Even if these compounds may have not been of interest in the original screening, they may come as interesting leads for other screening assays. Furthermore, we may be able to propose drug-target associations using chemical similarities and network patterns.