Cited by 0Evolution and Genetic DynamicsGenomics and Rare DiseasesProtein Structure and Dynamics

Uncovering differential tolerance to deletions versus substitutions with a protein language model

Open access
Goldman, Grant, Chati, Prathamesh, Ntranos, Vasilis·2025·Cell Systems

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Abstract Deep mutational scanning (DMS) experiments have been successfully leveraged to understand genotype to phenotype mapping, with broad implications for protein engineering, human genetics, drug development, and beyond. To date, however, the overwhelming majority of DMS have focused on amino acid substitutions, excluding other classes of variation such as deletions or insertions. As a consequence, it remains unclear how indels differentially shape the fitness landscape relative to substitutions. In order to further our understanding of the relationship between substitutions and deletions, we leveraged a protein language model to analyze every single amino acid deletion in the human proteome. We discovered hundreds of thousands of sites that display opposing behavior for deletions versus substitutions, i.e. sites that can tolerate being substituted but not deleted, and vice versa. We identified secondary structural elements and sequence context to be important mediators of differential tolerability at these sites. Our results underscore the value of deletion-substitution comparisons at the genome-wide scale, provide novel insights into how substitutions could systematically differ from deletions, and showcase the power of protein language models to generate biological hypotheses in-silico . All deletion-substitution comparisons can be explored and downloaded at https://huggingface.co/spaces/ntranoslab/diff-tol .

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cels.2025.101373

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Goldman, G., Chati, P., & Ntranos, V.
Affiliations
University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Ntranos, Vasilis
Venue
Cell Systems
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-09
Volume
16
Issue
9
Pages
101373
ISSN
2405-4712 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4414013285
Cited by
0
References
6
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cell Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (R01AI129731)
  • National Institutes of Health
  • NIH National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM150479)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
Keywords
amino acid deletion, amino acid substitutions, protein language models, deep mutational scanning, fitness landscape, genotype-phenotype mapping, protein secondary structure, sequence context, human proteome, protein evolution
MeSH terms
Humans, Proteins, Sequence Deletion, Amino Acid Substitution, Proteome

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