Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42855961›Full record

ReviewChembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology2026

Predicting Functional Diversity Within Enzyme Families: A Practical Perspective.

Nika Sokolova, Kristina Haslinger

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Nika SokolovaDepartment of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4129-2890
Kristina HaslingerDepartment of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Biology, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1361-1508

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek https://doi.org/10.61686/ZXZCQ29832
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning has become an increasingly powerful tool in enzyme discovery, enabling the prediction of enzyme activity, substrate scope, and functional specificity across diverse protein families. However, many reported models rely on narrowly sampled datasets and task-specific benchmarks, limiting their robustness and generalizability to distantly related enzymes or novel chemical substrates. In this concept article, we provide a practical, best-practice-oriented perspective on developing enzyme family- or class-specific machine learning (ML) predictors with an emphasis on data quality, representation, and model interpretability. We first discuss strategies for assembling biochemical datasets from literature, highlighting common sources of bias, redundancy, and uncertainty impacting downstream model performance. We then outline key considerations for generating new experimental data that are better suited for ML applications, including dataset design and coverage of enzyme and chemical space. Next, we summarize core computational steps involved in constructing enzyme and substrate representations, training and testing predictive models, and analyzing learned embedding spaces. Finally, we discuss outstanding technical challenges, such as mitigating taxonomic sampling bias, computing representations of enzymes with cofactors and post-translational modifications, and integrating predictions into design-build-test-learn cycles for real-world applications.

Indexed as

EnzymesMachine LearningPrediction AlgorithmsPredictive Learning ModelsSubstrate SpecificityEnzymesbiocatalysisenzymeshigh‐throughput screeningmachine learningsubstrate scope

Identifiers

PMID42855961
PMCPMC13653115

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.