Cited by 14Carbohydrate Chemistry and SynthesisGlycosylation and Glycoproteins ResearchEnzyme Catalysis and Immobilization

GASP: A Pan-Specific Predictor of Family 1 Glycosyltransferase Acceptor Specificity Enabled by a Pipeline for Substrate Feature Generation and Large-Scale Experimental Screening

Open access
Harding-Larsen, David, Madsen, Christian Degnbol, Teze, David, Kittilä, Tiia, Langhorn, Mads Rosander, Gharabli, Hani, Hobusch, Mandy, Otalvaro, Felipe Mejia +5 more·2024·ACS Omega

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Glycosylation represents a major chemical challenge; while it is one of the most common reactions in Nature, conventional chemistry struggles with stereochemistry, regioselectivity, and solubility issues. In contrast, family 1 glycosyltransferase (GT1) enzymes can glycosylate virtually any given nucleophilic group with perfect control over stereochemistry and regioselectivity. However, the appropriate catalyst for a given reaction needs to be identified among the tens of thousands of available sequences. Here, we present the glycosyltransferase acceptor specificity predictor (GASP) model, a data-driven approach to the identification of reactive GT1:acceptor pairs. We trained a random forest-based acceptor predictor on literature data and validated it on independent in-house generated data on 1001 GT1:acceptor pairs, obtaining an AUROC of 0.79 and a balanced accuracy of 72%. The performance was stable even in the case of completely new GT1s and acceptors not present in the training data set, highlighting the pan-specificity of GASP. Moreover, the model is capable of parsing all known GT1 sequences, as well as all chemicals, the latter through a pipeline for the generation of 153 chemical features for a given molecule taking the CID or SMILES as input (freely available at https://github.com/degnbol/GASP). To investigate the power of GASP, the model prediction probability scores were compared to GT1 substrate conversion yields from a newly published data set, with the top 50% of GASP predictions corresponding to reactions with >50% synthetic yields. The model was also tested in two comparative case studies: glycosylation of the antihelminth drug niclosamide and the plant defensive compound DIBOA. In the first study, the model achieved an 83% hit rate, outperforming a hit rate of 53% from a random selection assay. In the second case study, the hit rate of GASP was 50%, and while being lower than the hit rate of 83% using expert-selected enzymes, it provides a reasonable performance for the cases when an expert opinion is unavailable. The hierarchal importance of the generated chemical features was investigated by negative feature selection, revealing properties related to cyclization and atom hybridization status to be the most important characteristics for accurate prediction. Our study provides a GT1:acceptor predictor which can be trained on other data sets enabled by the automated feature generation pipelines. We also release the new in-house generated data set used for testing of GASP to facilitate the future development of GT1 activity predictors and their robust benchmarking.

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 · 10.1021/acsomega.4c01583

Cites

2 of 2 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Harding-Larsen, D., Madsen, C. D., Teze, D., Kittilä, T., Langhorn, M. R., Gharabli, H., Hobusch, M., Otalvaro, F. M., Kırtel, O., Bidart, G. N., Mazurenko, S., Travnik, E., & Welner, D. H.
Affiliations
  • Technical University of Denmark (DK)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • Technical University of Denmark , , Kemitorvet 220 , ,
  • Masaryk University (CZ)
Corresponding author
Welner, Ditte Hededam
Venue
ACS Omega
Published
2024-06-11
Volume
9
Issue
25
Pages
27278-27288
ISSN
2470-1343 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4399519895
Cited by
14
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2
FWCI
2.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACS Omega (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • ChemRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Veřejné služby Informačního systému (Masarykiana Brunensis Universitas) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Technical University of Denmark, DTU Orbit (Technical University of Denmark, DTU) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (857560)
  • Ministerstvo ?kolstv?, Ml?de?e a Telov?chovy (LM2023055, LM2023069)
  • Novo Nordisk Fonden (NNF10CC1016517, NNF18OC0034744, NNF19SA0035438, NNF20CC0035580)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Organic Chemistry › Carbohydrate Chemistry and Synthesis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Glycosylation and Glycoproteins Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Enzyme Catalysis and Immobilization
Keywords
glycosylation, random forest, DIBOA, enzyme screening, feature importance, automatic feature selection, regioselectivity, stereocontrol

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