Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35534620›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Reaching alignment-profile-based accuracy in predicting protein secondary and tertiary structural properties without alignment.

Jaspreet Singh, Kuldip Paliwal, Thomas Litfin, Jaswinder Singh, Yaoqi Zhou

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Sequence-Based Prediction for Protein Solvent Accessibility.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Exploring protein functions from structural flexibility using CABS-flex modeling.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2024
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Jaspreet SinghSignal Processing Laboratory, School of Engineering and Built Environment, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, 4111, Australia. jaspreetsingh2@griffithuni.edu.au.
Kuldip PaliwalSignal Processing Laboratory, School of Engineering and Built Environment, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, 4111, Australia. k.paliwal@griffith.edu.au.
Thomas LitfinSignal Processing Laboratory, School of Engineering and Built Environment, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, 4111, Australia.
Jaswinder SinghSignal Processing Laboratory, School of Engineering and Built Environment, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, 4111, Australia.
Yaoqi ZhouInstitute for Glycomics, Griffith University, Parklands Dr. Southport, Goldcoast, QLD, 4222, Australia. zhouyq@szbl.ac.cn.
Griffith University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protein language models have emerged as an alternative to multiple sequence alignment for enriching sequence information and improving downstream prediction tasks such as biophysical, structural, and functional properties. Here we show that a method called SPOT-1D-LM combines traditional one-hot encoding with the embeddings from two different language models (ProtTrans and ESM-1b) for the input and yields a leap in accuracy over single-sequence-based techniques in predicting protein 1D secondary and tertiary structural properties, including backbone torsion angles, solvent accessibility and contact numbers for all six test sets (TEST2018, TEST2020, Neff1-2020, CASP12-FM, CASP13-FM and CASP14-FM). More significantly, it has a performance comparable to profile-based methods for those proteins with homologous sequences. For example, the accuracy for three-state secondary structure (SS3) prediction for TEST2018 and TEST2020 proteins are 86.7% and 79.8% by SPOT-1D-LM, compared to 74.3% and 73.4% by the single-sequence-based method SPOT-1D-Single and 86.2% and 80.5% by the profile-based method SPOT-1D, respectively. For proteins without homologous sequences (Neff1-2020) SS3 is 80.41% by SPOT-1D-LM which is 3.8% and 8.3% higher than SPOT-1D-Single and SPOT-1D, respectively. SPOT-1D-LM is expected to be useful for genome-wide analysis given its fast performance. Moreover, high-accuracy prediction of both secondary and tertiary structural properties such as backbone angles and solvent accessibility without sequence alignment suggests that highly accurate prediction of protein structures may be made without homologous sequences, the remaining obstacle in the post AlphaFold2 era.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsProteinsProtein Structure, SecondarySequence AlignmentSolventsProteinsSolvents

Identifiers

PMID35534620
PMCPMC9085874
OpenAlexW4229451461

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.