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 accessPublished 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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
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
Evolutionary-scale prediction of atomic level protein structure with a language model
Lin, Z., Akin, H., Rao, R., Hie, B., Zhu, Z., Lu, W., Smetanin, N., Verkuil, R., Kabeli, O., Shmueli, Y., et al. (2022) · doi:10.1101/2022.07.20.500902 · Cited by 5,990
Rives, A., Meier, J., Sercu, T., Goyal, S., Lin, Z., Liu, J., Guo, D., Ott, M., Zitnick, C. L., Ma, J., et al. (2021) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2016239118 · Cited by 3,286
Rives, A., Meier, J., Sercu, T., Goyal, S., Lin, Z., Liu, J., Guo, D., Ott, M., Zitnick, C. L., Ma, J., et al. (2019) · doi:10.1101/622803 · Cited by 3,280
ProtTrans: Toward Understanding the Language of Life Through Self-Supervised Learning
Elnaggar, A., Heinzinger, M., Dallago, C., Rehawi, G., Wang, Y., Jones, L., Gibbs, T., Feher, T., Angerer, C., Steinegger, M., et al. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2021.3095381 · Cited by 2,329
Suñé, P., Suñé, J. M., & Montoro, J. B. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054583 · Cited by 1,687
Learning the language of viral evolution and escape
Hie, B., Zhong, E. D., Berger, B., & Bryson, B. (2021) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abd7331 · Cited by 361
Elhage, N., Hume, T., Olsson, C., Schiefer, N., Henighan, T., Kravec, S., Hatfield-Dodds, Z., Lasenby, R., Drain, D., Chen, C., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2209.10652 · Cited by 51
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 29
- 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
- Dehal, 2010, FastTree 2 – approximately maximum-likelihood trees for large alignments, PloS One, 5, 1, 10.1371/journal.pone.0009490 · DOI · Paper page
- Le, 2008, An improved general amino acid replacement matrix, Mol Biol Evol, 25, 1307, 10.1093/molbev/msn067 · DOI · Paper page
- Zhan, 2015, Improving multiple sequence alignment by using better guide trees, BMC Bioinform, 16, S4, 10.1186/1471-2105-16-S5-S4 · DOI
- 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
- Brown, 2006, Functional classification using phylogenomic inference, PLoS Comput Biol, 2, e77, 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0020077 · DOI
- Jiang, 2008, Protein function predictions based on the phylogenetic profile method, Crit Rev Biotechnol, 28, 233, 10.1080/07388550802512633 · DOI
- Musil, 2020, FireProtASR: a web server for fully automated ancestral sequence reconstruction, Brief Bioinform, 22, 12, 10.1093/bib/bbaa337 · DOI
- 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
- 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
- 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
- Giovanni Iovino, 2024, Protein embedding based alignment, BMC Bioinform, 25, 85, 10.1186/s12859-024-05699-5 · DOI · Paper page
- 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
- 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
- Qiu, 2021, Cluster learning-assisted directed evolution, Nat Comput Sci, 1, 809, 10.1038/s43588-021-00168-y · DOI
- 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
- 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
- Roa, 2021, Msa transformer
- Hayes, Simulating 500 million years of evolution with a language model, bioRxiv, 10.1101/2024.07.01.600583 · DOI
- Heinzinger, 2024, ProstT5: bilingual language model for protein sequence and structure, 10.1093/nargab/lqae150 · DOI · Paper page
- Mistry, 2020, Pfam: the protein families database in 2021, Nucleic Acids Res, 49, D412, 10.1093/nar/gkaa913 · DOI · Paper page
- Kriegeskorte, 2008, Representational similarity analysis - connecting the branches of systems neuroscience, Front Syst Neurosci, 2, 10.3389/neuro.06.004.2008 · DOI · Paper page
- Abnar, Proceedings of the 2019 ACL Workshop BlackboxNLP: Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP, 10.18653/v1/W19-4820 · DOI
- Huerta-Cepas, 2016, ETE 3: reconstruction, analysis, and visualization of phylogenomic data, Mol Biol Evol, 33, 1635, 10.1093/molbev/msw046 · DOI
- Valeriani, The geometry of hidden representations of protein language models, 10.1101/2022.10.24.513504 · DOI
- Hodges, 1958, The significance probability of the smirnov two-sample test, Ark Mat, 3, 469, 10.1007/BF02589501 · DOI
- 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
- 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
- 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
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2024-11-22
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 1467-5463 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-4054
- PMC
- PMC11847157
- OpenAlex
- W4407867672
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 10
- FWCI
- 2.59
- 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)
- 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