ArticleACS omega2026
Machine Learning Prediction and Experimental Validation of Antimicrobial Peptide Activity Differences against Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Bacteria.
Article in ACS omega, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are primary candidates for addressing bacterial resistance. Although their target spectrum specificity varies significantly between Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, current predictive models generally lack experimental validation. In this study, we constructed various machine learning models based on known sequences to systematically evaluate the performance of k-mer frequencies, physicochemical properties, and hybrid features in distinguishing the AMP target specificity. Results indicated that the random forest model based on eight key physicochemical properties performed best, achieving a test set accuracy of 82.09% with balanced classification and robust generalization. Feature importance analysis revealed that hydrophilicity and isoelectric point (pI) are the core physicochemical factors determining the target spectrum differences. The model was rigorously validated through a dual-track approach: first, via the synthesis and in vitro testing of 18 novel protozoan-derived AMPs (overall accuracy 66.67%) and, second, through a blind test on 55 independent external sequences, achieving a robust accuracy of 81.82%. Furthermore, the framework successfully identified candidates with potent activity against multidrug-resistant pathogens including
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.