Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41378883›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2025

PLiCat: decoding protein-lipid interactions by large language model.

Feitong Dong, Jingrou Wu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Feitong DongDepartment of Chemical Biology, School of Life Sciences, Southern University of Science and Technology, Xueyuan Avenue, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518055, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8315-7086
Jingrou WuDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Xueyuan Avenue, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518055, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protein-lipid interactions are essential for many cellular processes, as proteins associate with diverse lipid molecules to exert distinct functions. However, existing approaches are limited in discriminating among lipid categories, leaving a gap in our understanding of lipid-binding specificity. Recent advances in protein language models have opened new possibilities for discovering novel sequence insights. Here, we introduce PLiCat (Protein-Lipid interaction Categorization tool), a sequence-based framework designed to predict the categories of lipids that interact with proteins. PLiCat employs a hybrid deep learning architecture that integrates ESMC with BERT, enabling accurate and interpretable classification across eight major lipid categories. Through attribution analysis, PLiCat uncovers the sequence-encoded lipid-binding signatures and highlights residues contributing to binding specificity. Notably, PLiCat shows potential for identifying lipid-binding sites hidden in protein sequences. Furthermore, PLiCat can be used to assess the impact of pathogenic mutations on lipid-binding events. Collectively, PLiCat provides the first computational tool for lipid category prediction from protein sequence alone, offering valuable insights into lipid recognition mechanisms, and with promising applications in guiding rational protein design. The PLiCat source code and processed datasets are available at https://github.com/Noora68/PLiCat.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyLipid MetabolismLipidsProteinsSoftwareBinding SitesDeep LearningHumansLarge Language ModelsProtein BindingLipidsProteinsBERTESMClipid-binding sitesprotein language modelprotein–lipid interaction

Identifiers

PMID41378883
PMCPMC12696715

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.