Cited by 19Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesMachine Learning in BioinformaticsProtein Structure and Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Do protein language models learn phylogeny?

Open access
Tule, Sanjana, Foley, Gabriel, Bodén, Mikael·2024·Briefings in Bioinformatics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Deep machine learning demonstrates a capacity to uncover evolutionary relationships directly from protein sequences, in effect internalising notions inherent to classical phylogenetic tree inference. We connect these two paradigms by assessing the capacity of protein-based language models (pLMs) to discern phylogenetic relationships without being explicitly trained to do so. We evaluate ESM2, ProtTrans, and MSA-Transformer relative to classical phylogenetic methods, while also considering sequence insertions and deletions (indels) across 114 Pfam datasets. The largest ESM2 model tends to outperform other pLMs (including the multimodal ESM3) by recovering phylogenetic relationships among homologous protein sequences in both low- and high-gap settings. pLMs agree with conventional phylogenetic methods in general, but more so for protein families with fewer implied indels, highlighting indels as a key factor differentiating classical phylogenetics from pLMs. We find that pLMs preferentially capture broader as opposed to finer evolutionary relationships within a specific protein family, where ESM2 has a sweet spot for highly divergent sequences, at remote distance. Less than 10% of neurons are sufficient to broadly recapitulate classical phylogenetic distances; when used in isolation, the difference between the paradigms is further diminished. We show these neurons are polysemantic, shared among different homologous families but never fully overlapping. We highlight the potential of ESM2 as a complementary tool for phylogenetic analysis, especially when extending to remote homologs that are difficult to align and imply complex histories of insertions and deletions. Implementations of analyses are available at https://github.com/santule/pLMEvo.

Overview

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 · 10.1093/bib/bbaf047

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 8 references

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. Minh, 2020, IQ-TREE 2: new models and efficient methods for phylogenetic inference in the genomic era, Mol Biol Evol, 37, 1530, 10.1093/molbev/msaa015 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Dehal, 2010, FastTree 2 – approximately maximum-likelihood trees for large alignments, PloS One, 5, 1, 10.1371/journal.pone.0009490 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Le, 2008, An improved general amino acid replacement matrix, Mol Biol Evol, 25, 1307, 10.1093/molbev/msn067 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Zhan, 2015, Improving multiple sequence alignment by using better guide trees, BMC Bioinform, 16, S4, 10.1186/1471-2105-16-S5-S4 · DOI
  5. Tóth, 2013, Iteratively refined guide trees help improving alignment and phylogenetic inference in the mushroom family bolbitiaceae, PloS One, 8, 1, 10.1371/journal.pone.0056143 · DOI
  6. Brown, 2006, Functional classification using phylogenomic inference, PLoS Comput Biol, 2, e77, 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0020077 · DOI
  7. Jiang, 2008, Protein function predictions based on the phylogenetic profile method, Crit Rev Biotechnol, 28, 233, 10.1080/07388550802512633 · DOI
  8. Musil, 2020, FireProtASR: a web server for fully automated ancestral sequence reconstruction, Brief Bioinform, 22, 12, 10.1093/bib/bbaa337 · DOI
  9. Foley, 2022, Engineering indel and substitution variants of diverse and ancient enzymes using graphical representation of ancestral sequence predictions, PLoS Comput Biol, 18, 1, 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010633 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Kaminski, 2023, pLM-BLAST: distant homology detection based on direct comparison of sequence representations from protein language models, Bioinformatics, 39, 09, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btad579 · DOI
  11. Hie, 2022, Evolutionary velocity with protein language models predicts evolutionary dynamics of diverse proteins, Cell Syst, 13, 274, 10.1016/j.cels.2022.01.003 · DOI
  12. Giovanni Iovino, 2024, Protein embedding based alignment, BMC Bioinform, 25, 85, 10.1186/s12859-024-05699-5 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Pantolini, 2024, Embedding-based alignment: combining protein language models with dynamic programming alignment to detect structural similarities in the twilight-zone, Bioinformatics, 40, btad786, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btad786 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Meier, 2021, Language models enable zero-shot prediction of the effects of mutations on protein function, 10.1101/2021.07.09.450648 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Qiu, 2021, Cluster learning-assisted directed evolution, Nat Comput Sci, 1, 809, 10.1038/s43588-021-00168-y · DOI
  16. Wittmann, 2021, Informed training set design enables efficient machine learning-assisted directed protein evolution, Cell Syst, 12, 1026, 10.1016/j.cels.2021.07.008 · DOI
  17. Lupo, 2022, Protein language models trained on multiple sequence alignments learn phylogenetic relationships, Nat Commun, 13, 6298, 10.1038/s41467-022-34032-y · DOI · Paper page
  18. Roa, 2021, Msa transformer
  19. Hayes, Simulating 500 million years of evolution with a language model, bioRxiv, 10.1101/2024.07.01.600583 · DOI
  20. Heinzinger, 2024, ProstT5: bilingual language model for protein sequence and structure, 10.1093/nargab/lqae150 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Mistry, 2020, Pfam: the protein families database in 2021, Nucleic Acids Res, 49, D412, 10.1093/nar/gkaa913 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Kriegeskorte, 2008, Representational similarity analysis - connecting the branches of systems neuroscience, Front Syst Neurosci, 2, 10.3389/neuro.06.004.2008 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Abnar, Proceedings of the 2019 ACL Workshop BlackboxNLP: Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP, 10.18653/v1/W19-4820 · DOI
  24. Huerta-Cepas, 2016, ETE 3: reconstruction, analysis, and visualization of phylogenomic data, Mol Biol Evol, 33, 1635, 10.1093/molbev/msw046 · DOI
  25. Valeriani, The geometry of hidden representations of protein language models, 10.1101/2022.10.24.513504 · DOI
  26. Hodges, 1958, The significance probability of the smirnov two-sample test, Ark Mat, 3, 469, 10.1007/BF02589501 · DOI
  27. Dalvi, 2018, What is one grain of sand in the desert? Analyzing individual neurons in deep nlp models, 6309, 10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33016309 · DOI
  28. Illergård, 2009, Structure is three to ten times more conserved than sequence–a study of structural response in protein cores, Proteins, 77, 499, 10.1002/prot.22458 · DOI
  29. Ding, Protein language models are biased by unequal sequence sampling across the tree of life, 10.1101/2024.03.07.584001 · DOI · Paper page

Metadata

Authors
Tule, S., Foley, G., & Bodén, M.
Affiliations
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, The University of Queensland , Brisbane, QLD 4072 ,
Venue
Briefings in Bioinformatics
Published
2024-11-22
Volume
26
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 1467-5463 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-4054
OpenAlex
W4407867672
Cited by
19
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 10
FWCI
2.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Briefings in Bioinformatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
Keywords
protein language models, phylogenetic inference, ESM-2, indels, phylogenetic distance, remote homologs, protein sequence evolution, Pfam protein families
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Deep Learning, Humans, Phylogeny, Proteins, Evolution, Molecular, Computational Biology, INDEL Mutation

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