Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33462256›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Identifying protein subcellular localisation in scientific literature using bidirectional deep recurrent neural network.

Rakesh David, Rhys-Joshua D Menezes, Jan De Klerk, Ian R Castleden, Cornelia M Hooper, Gustavo Carneiro, Matthew Gilliham

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Protein subcellular localization prediction tools.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024
    Review
  2. Review
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

7 authors.

Rakesh DavidSchool of Agriculture, Food and Wine, The Waite Research Institute, ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, Waite Campus, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia. rakesh.david@adelaide.edu.au.
Rhys-Joshua D MenezesSchool of Computer Science, Australian Institute for Machine Learning, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Jan De KlerkSchool of Computer Science, Australian Institute for Machine Learning, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Ian R CastledenARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
Cornelia M HooperARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
Gustavo CarneiroSchool of Computer Science, Australian Institute for Machine Learning, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Matthew GillihamSchool of Agriculture, Food and Wine, The Waite Research Institute, ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, Waite Campus, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The increased diversity and scale of published biological data has to led to a growing appreciation for the applications of machine learning and statistical methodologies to gain new insights. Key to achieving this aim is solving the Relationship Extraction problem which specifies the semantic interaction between two or more biological entities in a published study. Here, we employed two deep neural network natural language processing (NLP) methods, namely: the continuous bag of words (CBOW), and the bi-directional long short-term memory (bi-LSTM). These methods were employed to predict relations between entities that describe protein subcellular localisation in plants. We applied our system to 1700 published Arabidopsis protein subcellular studies from the SUBA manually curated dataset. The system combines pre-processing of full-text articles in a machine-readable format with relevant sentence extraction for downstream NLP analysis. Using the SUBA corpus, the neural network classifier predicted interactions between protein name, subcellular localisation and experimental methodology with an average precision, recall rate, accuracy and F1 scores of 95.1%, 82.8%, 89.3% and 88.4% respectively (n = 30). Comparable scoring metrics were obtained using the CropPAL database as an independent testing dataset that stores protein subcellular localisation in crop species, demonstrating wide applicability of prediction model. We provide a framework for extracting protein functional features from unstructured text in the literature with high accuracy, improving data dissemination and unlocking the potential of big data text analytics for generating new hypotheses.

Identifiers

PMID33462256
PMCPMC7813825

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.