ArticleBMC bioinformatics2014
Multidimensional mutual information methods for the analysis of covariation in multiple sequence alignments.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- EvoWeaver: large-scale prediction of gene functional associations from coevolutionary signals.Nature communications · 2025Article
- General strategies for using amino acid sequence data to guide biochemical investigation of protein function.Biochemical Society transactions · 2022Review
- Application of information theoretical approaches to assess diversity and similarity in single-cell transcriptomics.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2020Review
- Coevolution analysis of amino-acids reveals diversified drug-resistance solutions in viral sequences: a case study of hepatitis B virus.Virus evolution · 2020Article
- Emerging Computational Methods for the Rational Discovery of Allosteric Drugs.Chemical reviews · 2016Review
- Multidimensional Recurrence Quantification Analysis (MdRQA) for the Analysis of Multidimensional Time-Series: A Software Implementation in MATLAB and Its Application to Group-Level Data in Joint Action.Frontiers in psychology · 2016Article
- Protein Residue Contacts and Prediction Methods.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2016Article
- Coevolutionary analyses require phylogenetically deep alignments and better null models to accurately detect inter-protein contacts within and between species.BMC bioinformatics · 2015Article
- Mutual Information between Discrete Variables with Many Categories using Recursive Adaptive Partitioning.Scientific reports · 2015Article
- Genetic analysis, structural modeling, and direct coupling analysis suggest a mechanism for phosphate signaling in Escherichia coli.BMC genetics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSeveral methods are available for the detection of covarying positions from a multiple sequence alignment (MSA). If the MSA contains a large number of sequences, information about the proximities between residues derived from covariation maps can be sufficient to predict a protein fold. However, in many cases the structure is already known, and information on the covarying positions can be valuable to understand the protein mechanism and dynamic properties.
resultsIn this study we have sought to determine whether a multivariate (multidimensional) extension of traditional mutual information (MI) can be an additional tool to study covariation. The performance of two multidimensional MI (mdMI) methods, designed to remove the effect of ternary/quaternary interdependencies, was tested with a set of 9 MSAs each containing <400 sequences, and was shown to be comparable to that of the newest methods based on maximum entropy/pseudolikelyhood statistical models of protein sequences. However, while all the methods tested detected a similar number of covarying pairs among the residues separated by < 8 Å in the reference X-ray structures, there was on average less than 65% overlap between the top scoring pairs detected by methods that are based on different principles.
conclusionsGiven the large variety of structure and evolutionary history of different proteins it is possible that a single best method to detect covariation in all proteins does not exist, and that for each protein family the best information can be derived by merging/comparing results obtained with different methods. This approach may be particularly valuable in those cases in which the size of the MSA is small or the quality of the alignment is low, leading to significant differences in the pairs detected by different methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.