Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38600441›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2024

KEGG orthology prediction of bacterial proteins using natural language processing.

Jing Chen, Haoyu Wu, Ning Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

3 authors.

Jing ChenSchool of Artificial Intelligence and Computer Science, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, China.
Haoyu WuSchool of Artificial Intelligence and Computer Science, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, China.
Ning WangSchool of Artificial Intelligence and Computer Science, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, China. 8202206032@jiangnan.edu.cn.

Funding

Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities JUSRP123035
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe advent of high-throughput technologies has led to an exponential increase in uncharacterized bacterial protein sequences, surpassing the capacity of manual curation. A large number of bacterial protein sequences remain unannotated by Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) orthology, making it necessary to use auto annotation tools. These tools are now indispensable in the biological research landscape, bridging the gap between the vastness of unannotated sequences and meaningful biological insights.

resultsIn this work, we propose a novel pipeline for KEGG orthology annotation of bacterial protein sequences that uses natural language processing and deep learning. To assess the effectiveness of our pipeline, we conducted evaluations using the genomes of two randomly selected species from the KEGG database. In our evaluation, we obtain competitive results on precision, recall, and F1 score, with values of 0.948, 0.947, and 0.947, respectively.

conclusionsOur experimental results suggest that our pipeline demonstrates performance comparable to traditional methods and excels in identifying distant relatives with low sequence identity. This demonstrates the potential of our pipeline to significantly improve the accuracy and comprehensiveness of KEGG orthology annotation, thereby advancing our understanding of functional relationships within biological systems.

Indexed as

Bacterial ProteinsNatural Language ProcessingAmino Acid SequenceGenomeMolecular Sequence AnnotationBacterial ProteinsDeep learningKEGG orthologyProtein function predictionProtein language model

Identifiers

PMID38600441
PMCPMC11007918

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.