ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2024
Genotype sampling for deep-learning assisted experimental mapping of a combinatorially complete fitness landscape.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- How far can you go? Extrapolating values of catalytic activity from known protein landscapes in natural and directed evolution.Chemical Society reviews · 2026Review
- Functional bottlenecks can emerge from non-epistatic underlying traits.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Exploring the space of self-reproducing ribozymes using generative models.Nature communications · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
motivationExperimental characterization of fitness landscapes, which map genotypes onto fitness, is important for both evolutionary biology and protein engineering. It faces a fundamental obstacle in the astronomical number of genotypes whose fitness needs to be measured for any one protein. Deep learning may help to predict the fitness of many genotypes from a smaller neural network training sample of genotypes with experimentally measured fitness. Here I use a recently published experimentally mapped fitness landscape of more than 260 000 protein genotypes to ask how such sampling is best performed.
resultsI show that multilayer perceptrons, recurrent neural networks, convolutional networks, and transformers, can explain more than 90% of fitness variance in the data. In addition, 90% of this performance is reached with a training sample comprising merely ≈103 sequences. Generalization to unseen test data is best when training data is sampled randomly and uniformly, or sampled to minimize the number of synonymous sequences. In contrast, sampling to maximize sequence diversity or codon usage bias reduces performance substantially. These observations hold for more than one network architecture. Simple sampling strategies may perform best when training deep learning neural networks to map fitness landscapes from experimental data. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The fitness landscape data analyzed here is publicly available as described previously (Papkou et al. 2023). All code used to analyze this landscape is publicly available at https://github.com/andreas-wagner-uzh/fitness_landscape_sampling.
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.