Cited by 105Protein Structure and DynamicsEnzyme Structure and FunctionMachine Learning in Bioinformatics

Structure prediction of alternative protein conformations

Open access
Bryant, Patrick, Noé, Frank·2024·Nature Communications

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Proteins are dynamic molecules whose movements result in different conformations with different functions. Neural networks such as AlphaFold2 can predict the structure of single-chain proteins with conformations most likely to exist in the PDB. However, almost all protein structures with multiple conformations represented in the PDB have been used while training these models. Therefore, it is unclear whether alternative protein conformations can be genuinely predicted using these networks, or if they are simply reproduced from memory. Here, we train a structure prediction network, Cfold, on a conformational split of the PDB to generate alternative conformations. Cfold enables efficient exploration of the conformational landscape of monomeric protein structures. Over 50% of experimentally known nonredundant alternative protein conformations evaluated here are predicted with high accuracy (TM-score > 0.8).

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 · 10.1038/s41467-024-51507-2

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.

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.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 38 · Cited by 105

Authors
Bryant, P., & Noé, F.
Affiliations
  • Stockholm University (SE)
  • Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
Corresponding author
Bryant, Patrick
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2024-08-26
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
7328-7328
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4401895022
Cited by
105
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 2
FWCI
13.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • DeepMind
  • European Commission (2020 ‘, CoG 772230, ERC CoG 772230, 772230)
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB 1114 projects A04 and C03, SFB/TRR 186, Project A12, SFB1114/C03, TRR186, RTG 2433, SFB/TRR186, RTG 2433 Project Q04, SFB1114, Project A12)
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
  • Technische Universität Dresden
  • Science for Life Laboratory (KAW 2020.0239)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Enzyme Structure and Function
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
Keywords
protein structure prediction, conformational landscape, AlphaFold2, monomeric protein, protein dynamics, conformational heterogeneity
MeSH terms
Models, Molecular, Protein Conformation, Proteins, Neural Networks, Computer, Computational Biology, Databases, Protein

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