Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39827171›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Benchmarking protein language models for protein crystallization.

Raghvendra Mall, Rahul Kaushik, Zachary A Martinez, Matt W Thomson, Filippo Castiglione

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Artificial intelligence directed computational protein design: lessons from COVID-19 for pandemic-ready vaccines and antibody therapeutics.Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Perspectives Towards AI and ML.Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology · 2026
    Review
  11. Review
  12. 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.

Raghvendra MallBiotechnology Research Center, Technology Innovation Institute, P.O. Box 9639, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. raghvendra.mall@tii.ae.
Rahul KaushikBiotechnology Research Center, Technology Innovation Institute, P.O. Box 9639, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Zachary A MartinezDivision of Biology and Bioengineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, 91125, CA, USA.
Matt W ThomsonDivision of Biology and Bioengineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, 91125, CA, USA.
Filippo CastiglioneBiotechnology Research Center, Technology Innovation Institute, P.O. Box 9639, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. filippo.castiglione@tii.ae.

Funding

A Global Map of Interactions Among Human Cell Surface Proteins and Secreted LigandsR01GM150125 · NIGMS · CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI GARCIA, KENAN CHRISTOPHER, THOMSON, MATTHEW W. · 2022 to 2025
$11.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM150125
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The problem of protein structure determination is usually solved by X-ray crystallography. Several in silico deep learning methods have been developed to overcome the high attrition rate, cost of experiments and extensive trial-and-error settings, for predicting the crystallization propensities of proteins based on their sequences. In this work, we benchmark the power of open protein language models (PLMs) through the TRILL platform, a be-spoke framework democratizing the usage of PLMs for the task of predicting crystallization propensities of proteins. By comparing LightGBM / XGBoost classifiers built on the average embedding representations of proteins learned by different PLMs, such as ESM2, Ankh, ProtT5-XL, ProstT5, xTrimoPGLM, SaProt with the performance of state-of-the-art sequence-based methods like DeepCrystal, ATTCrys and CLPred, we identify the most effective methods for predicting crystallization outcomes. The LightGBM classifiers utilizing embeddings from ESM2 model with 30 and 36 transformer layers and 150 and 3000 million parameters respectively have performance gains by 3-[Formula: see text] than all compared models for various evaluation metrics, including AUPR (Area Under Precision-Recall Curve), AUC (Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve), and F1 on independent test sets. Furthermore, we fine-tune the ProtGPT2 model available via TRILL to generate crystallizable proteins. Starting with 3000 generated proteins and through a step of filtration processes including consensus of all open PLM-based classifiers, sequence identity through CD-HIT, secondary structure compatibility, aggregation screening, homology search and foldability evaluation, we identified a set of 5 novel proteins as potentially crystallizable.

Indexed as

ProteinsBenchmarkingComputational BiologyCrystallizationCrystallography, X-RayDeep LearningModels, MolecularProtein ConformationProteinsBenchmarkingOpen protein language models (PLMs)Protein crystallizationProtein generation

Identifiers

PMID39827171
PMCPMC11743144

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.