Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31293833›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2019

TOXIFY: a deep learning approach to classify animal venom proteins.

T Jeffrey Cole, Michael S Brewer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Quantitative analysis of growth and diversification in venom data using database metrics.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A large language model for predicting neurotoxic peptides and neurotoxins.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Structure-aware deep learning model for peptide toxicity prediction.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

T Jeffrey ColeDepartment of Biology, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, United States of America.
Michael S BrewerDepartment of Biology, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the era of Next-Generation Sequencing and shotgun proteomics, the sequences of animal toxigenic proteins are being generated at rates exceeding the pace of traditional means for empirical toxicity verification. To facilitate the automation of toxin identification from protein sequences, we trained Recurrent Neural Networks with Gated Recurrent Units on publicly available datasets. The resulting models are available via the novel software package TOXIFY, allowing users to infer the probability of a given protein sequence being a venom protein. TOXIFY is more than 20X faster and uses over an order of magnitude less memory than previously published methods. Additionally, TOXIFY is more accurate, precise, and sensitive at classifying venom proteins.

Indexed as

Deep learningProtein classificationProteomeTranscriptomeVenom

Identifiers

PMID31293833
PMCPMC6601600

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.