DisDock : A Deep Learning Method for Metal Ion‐Protein Redocking
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
The structures of metalloproteins are essential for comprehending their functions and interactions. The breakthrough of AlphaFold has made it possible to predict protein structures with experimental accuracy. However, the type of metal ion that a metalloprotein binds and the binding structure are still not readily available, even with the predicted protein structure. In this study, we present DisDock, a deep learning method for predicting protein‐metal docking. DisDock takes distogram of randomly initialized protein‐ligand configuration as input and outputs the distogram of the predicted binding complex. It combines the U‐net architecture with self‐attention modules to enhance model performance. Taking inspiration from the physical principle that atoms in closer proximity display a stronger mutual attraction, this predictor capitalizes on geometric information to uncover latent characteristics indicative of atom interactions. To train our model, we employ a high‐quality metalloprotein dataset sourced from the Mother of All Databases (MOAD). Experimental results demonstrate that our approach outperforms other existing methods in prediction accuracy for various types of metal ions.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation
Ronneberger, O., Fischer, P., & Brox, T. (2015) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4_28 · Cited by 99,404 · see citing works
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 · Cited by 43,764 · see citing works
Binding MOAD (Mother Of All Databases)
Hu, L., Benson, M. L., Smith, R. D., Lerner, M. G., & Carlson, H. A. (2005) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.20512 · Cited by 328 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Lin, M., Li, K., Zhang, Y., Pan, F., Wu, W., & Zhang, J.
- Affiliations
- Florida State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Wu, Wei
- Zhang, Jinfeng
- Venue
- Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2025-01-22
- Volume
- 93
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1171-1180
- ISSN
- 0887-3585 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0134
- OpenAlex
- W4406707500
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 0.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics (publishedVersion)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
- Keywords
- metalloproteins, U-Net, self-attention, protein-ligand complex prediction
- MeSH terms
- Deep Learning, Algorithms, Binding Sites, Ions, Ligands, Metalloproteins, Metals, Protein Binding, Protein Conformation, Software, Computational Biology, Databases, Protein, Molecular Docking Simulation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review