ArticleBMC bioinformatics2016
Predicting the functions of a protein from its ability to associate with other molecules.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The influence of prompt engineering on large language models for protein-protein interaction identification in biomedical literature.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The loach haplotype-resolved genome and the identification of Mex3a involved in fish air breathing.Cell genomics · 2024Article
- Constructing Genetic Networks using Biomedical Literature and Rare Event Classification.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Erratum to: Predicting the functions of a protein from its ability to associate with other molecules.BMC bioinformatics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAll proteins associate with other molecules. These associated molecules are highly predictive of the potential functions of proteins. The association of a protein and a molecule can be determined from their co-occurrences in biomedical abstracts. Extensive semantically related co-occurrences of a protein's name and a molecule's name in the sentences of biomedical abstracts can be considered as indicative of the association between the protein and the molecule. Dependency parsers extract textual relations from a text by determining the grammatical relations between words in a sentence. They can be used for determining the textual relations between proteins and molecules. Despite their success, they may extract textual relations with low precision. This is because they do not consider the semantic relationships between terms in a sentence (i.e., they consider only the structural relationships between the terms). Moreover, they may not be well suited for complex sentences and for long-distance textual relations.
resultsWe introduce an information extraction system called PPFBM that predicts the functions of unannotated proteins from the molecules that associate with these proteins. PPFBM represents each protein by the other molecules that associate with it in the abstracts referenced in the protein's entries in reliable biological databases. It automatically extracts each co-occurrence of a protein-molecule pair that represents semantic relationship between the pair. Towards this, we present novel semantic rules that identify the semantic relationship between each co-occurrence of a protein-molecule pair using the syntactic structures of sentences and linguistics theories. PPFBM determines the functions of an un-annotated protein p as follows. First, it determines the set S r of annotated proteins that is semantically similar to p by matching the molecules representing p and the annotated proteins. Then, it assigns p the functional category FC if the significance of the frequency of occurrences of S r in abstracts associated with proteins annotated with FC is statistically significantly different than the significance of the frequency of occurrences of S r in abstracts associated with proteins annotated with all other functional categories. We evaluated the quality of PPFBM by comparing it experimentally with two other systems. Results showed marked improvement.
conclusionsThe experimental results demonstrated that PPFBM outperforms other systems that predict protein function from the textual information found within biomedical abstracts. This is because these system do not consider the semantic relationships between terms in a sentence (i.e., they consider only the structural relationships between the terms). PPFBM's performance over these system increases steadily as the number of training protein increases. That is, PPFBM's prediction performance becomes more accurate constantly, as the size of training proteins gets larger. This is because every time a new set of test proteins is added to the current set of training proteins. A demo of PPFBM that annotates each input Yeast protein (SGD (Saccharomyces Genome Database). Available at: http://www.yeastgenome.org/download-data/curation) with the functions of Gene Ontology terms is available at: (see Appendix for more details about the demo) http://ecesrvr.kustar.ac.ae:8080/PPFBM/.
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.