A large-scale assessment of sequence database search tools for homology-based protein function prediction
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Sequence database searches followed by homology-based function transfer form one of the oldest and most popular approaches for predicting protein functions, such as Gene Ontology (GO) terms. These searches are also a critical component in most state-of-the-art machine learning and deep learning-based protein function predictors. Although sequence search tools are the basis of homology-based protein function prediction, previous studies have scarcely explored how to select the optimal sequence search tools and configure their parameters to achieve the best function prediction. In this paper, we evaluate the effect of using different options from among popular search tools, as well as the impacts of search parameters, on protein function prediction. When predicting GO terms on a large benchmark dataset, we found that BLASTp and MMseqs2 consistently exceed the performance of other tools, including DIAMOND—one of the most popular tools for function prediction—under default search parameters. However, with the correct parameter settings, DIAMOND can perform comparably to BLASTp and MMseqs2 in function prediction. Additionally, we developed a new scoring function to derive GO prediction from homologous hits that consistently outperform previously proposed scoring functions. These findings enable the improvement of almost all protein function prediction algorithms with a few easily implementable changes in their sequence homolog-based component. This study emphasizes the critical role of search parameter settings in homology-based function transfer and should have an important contribution to the development of future protein function prediction algorithms.
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
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
Zhang, C., Zheng, W., Freddolino, L., & Zhang, Y. (2018) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2018.03.004 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Zhang, C., & Freddolino, L.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- Zhang, Chengxin
- Freddolino, Lydia
- Venue
- Briefings in Bioinformatics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2024-05-23
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 4
- ISSN
- 1467-5463 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-4054
- PMC
- PMC11262835
- OpenAlex
- W4400878682
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4
- FWCI
- 2.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Briefings in Bioinformatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (AI134678)
- National Science Foundation (2138259, 2138286, 2138307, 2137603, 2138296)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
- Keywords
- protein function prediction, BLASTP, MMseqs2, diamond, benchmark dataset
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