Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40139916›Full record

ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2025

Reconstruction of Ancestral Protein Sequences Using Autoregressive Generative Models.

Matteo De Leonardis, Andrea Pagnani, Pierre Barrat-Charlaix

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Ancient enzymes, new biotechnology applications.Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Protein Structural Phylogenetics.Genome biology and evolution · 2025
    Review
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.

Matteo De LeonardisDISAT, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, Torino 10129, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4082-4170
Andrea PagnaniDISAT, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, Torino 10129, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6509-0807
Pierre Barrat-CharlaixDISAT, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, Torino 10129, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3816-3724

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ancestral sequence reconstruction (ASR) is an important tool to understand how protein structure and function changed over the course of evolution. It essentially relies on models of sequence evolution that can quantitatively describe changes in a sequence over time. Such models usually consider that sequence positions evolve independently from each other and neglect epistasis: the context-dependence of the effect of mutations. On the other hand, the last years have seen major developments in the field of generative protein models, which learn constraints associated with structure and function from large ensembles of evolutionarily related proteins. Here, we show that it is possible to extend a specific type of generative model to describe the evolution of sequences in time while taking epistasis into account. We apply the developed technique to the problem of ASR: given a protein family and its evolutionary tree, we try to infer the sequences of extinct ancestors. Using both simulations and data coming from experimental evolution we show that our method outperforms state-of-the-art ones. Moreover, it allows for sampling a greater diversity of potential ancestors, allowing for a less biased characterization of ancestral sequences.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularModels, GeneticProteinsAlgorithmsAmino Acid SequenceComputer SimulationPhylogenyProteinsancestral sequence reconstructionco-evolutiongenerative models

Identifiers

PMID40139916
PMCPMC12006719

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.