Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39833102›Full record

ReviewBriefings in bioinformatics2024

Twenty years of advances in prediction of nucleic acid-binding residues in protein sequences.

Sushmita Basu, Jing Yu, Daisuke Kihara, Lukasz Kurgan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Accurate Identification of Protein Binding Sites for All Drug Modalities Using ALLSites.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Comparative assessment of binding residue predictions in intrinsically disordered regions.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2025
    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

4 authors.

Sushmita BasuDepartment of Computer Science, Virginia Commonwealth University, 401 West Main Street, Richmond, VA 23284, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9182-1191
Jing YuDepartment of Computer Science, Virginia Commonwealth University, 401 West Main Street, Richmond, VA 23284, United States.
Daisuke KiharaDepartment of Biological Sciences, Purdue University, 915 Mitch Daniels Boulevard, West Lafayette, IN 47907, United States.
Lukasz KurganDepartment of Computer Science, Virginia Commonwealth University, 401 West Main Street, Richmond, VA 23284, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7749-0314

Funding

Building protein structure models for intermediate resolution cryo-electron microscopy mapsR01GM133840 · NIGMS · PURDUE UNIVERSITY · PI KIHARA, DAISUKE · 2020 to 2023
$1.6M
National Science Foundation DBI 2146026National Science Foundation DBI 2146027NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM133840NIH HHS R01GM133840Robert J. Mattauch Endowment funds
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computational prediction of nucleic acid-binding residues in protein sequences is an active field of research, with over 80 methods that were released in the past 2 decades. We identify and discuss 87 sequence-based predictors that include dozens of recently published methods that are surveyed for the first time. We overview historical progress and examine multiple practical issues that include availability and impact of predictors, key features of their predictive models, and important aspects related to their training and assessment. We observe that the past decade has brought increased use of deep neural networks and protein language models, which contributed to substantial gains in the predictive performance. We also highlight advancements in vital and challenging issues that include cross-predictions between deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)-binding and ribonucleic acid (RNA)-binding residues and targeting the two distinct sources of binding annotations, structure-based versus intrinsic disorder-based. The methods trained on the structure-annotated interactions tend to perform poorly on the disorder-annotated binding and vice versa, with only a few methods that target and perform well across both annotation types. The cross-predictions are a significant problem, with some predictors of DNA-binding or RNA-binding residues indiscriminately predicting interactions with both nucleic acid types. Moreover, we show that methods with web servers are cited substantially more than tools without implementation or with no longer working implementations, motivating the development and long-term maintenance of the web servers. We close by discussing future research directions that aim to drive further progress in this area.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyDNADNA-Binding ProteinsNucleic AcidsRNARNA-Binding ProteinsSequence Analysis, ProteinAmino Acid SequenceBinding SitesHumansNeural Networks, ComputerProtein BindingProteinsDNADNA-Binding ProteinsNucleic AcidsProteinsRNARNA-Binding Proteinsdeep learningDNA-binding residueintrinsic disordermachine learningnucleic acid-bindingprotein–DNA interactionprotein–RNA interactionRNA-binding residuesequence-based prediction

Identifiers

PMID39833102
PMCPMC11745544

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.