ArticleResearch square2023
Improving AlphaFold predicted contacts in alpha-helical transmembrane proteins structures using structural features.
Article in Research square, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Residue contacts maps offer a 2-d reduced representation of 3-d protein structures and constitute a structural constraint and scaffold in structural modeling. In addition, contact maps are also an effective tool in identifying interhelical binding sites and drawing insights about protein function. While most works predict contact maps using features derived from sequences, we believe information from known structures can be leveraged for a prediction improvement in unknown structures where decent approximate structures such as ones predicted by AlphaFold2 are available. Results: Alphafold2's predicted structures are found to be quite accurate at inter-helical residue contact prediction task, achieving 83% average precision. We adopt an unconventional approach, using features extracted from atomic structures in the neighborhood of a residue pair and use them to predicting residue contact. We trained on features derived from experimentally determined structures and predicted on features derived from AlphaFold2's predicted structures. Our results demonstrate a remarkable improvement over AlphaFold2 achieving over 91.9% average precision for held-out and over 89.5% average precision in cross validation experiments. Conclusion: Training on features generated from experimentally determined structures, we were able to leverage knowledge from known structures to significantly improve the contacts predicted using AlphaFold2 structures. We demonstrated that using coordinates directly (instead of the proposed features) does not lead to an improvement in contact prediction performance.
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.