Cited by 70Enzyme Catalysis and ImmobilizationProtein Structure and DynamicsMachine Learning in Bioinformatics

Harnessing generative AI to decode enzyme catalysis and evolution for enhanced engineering

Open access
Xie, Wen Jun, Warshel, Arieh·2023·National Science Review

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Enzymes, as paramount protein catalysts, occupy a central role in fostering remarkable progress across numerous fields. However, the intricacy of sequence-function relationships continues to obscure our grasp of enzyme behaviors and curtails our capabilities in rational enzyme engineering. Generative artificial intelligence (AI), known for its proficiency in handling intricate data distributions, holds the potential to offer novel perspectives in enzyme research. Generative models could discern elusive patterns within the vast sequence space and uncover new functional enzyme sequences. This review highlights the recent advancements in employing generative AI for enzyme sequence analysis. We delve into the impact of generative AI in predicting mutation effects on enzyme fitness, catalytic activity and stability, rationalizing the laboratory evolution of de novo enzymes, and decoding protein sequence semantics and their application in enzyme engineering. Notably, the prediction of catalytic activity and stability of enzymes using natural protein sequences serves as a vital link, indicating how enzyme catalysis shapes enzyme evolution. Overall, we foresee that the integration of generative AI into enzyme studies will remarkably enhance our knowledge of enzymes and expedite the creation of superior biocatalysts.

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/nsr/nwad331

Cites

93 of 93 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
Xie, W. J., & Warshel, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Florida (US)
  • University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author
  • Xie, Wen Jun
  • Warshel, Arieh
Venue
National Science Review
Published
2023-11-06
Volume
10
Issue
12
Pages
nwad331-nwad331
ISSN
  • 2053-714X (ISSN-L)
  • 2095-5138
OpenAlex
W4390455781
Cited by
69
References
92
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 2
FWCI
1.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • National Science Review (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nd)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (R35 GM122472)
  • National Science Foundation (MCB 1707167)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Enzyme Catalysis and Immobilization
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
Keywords
generative AI, enzyme catalysis, enzyme evolution, rational enzyme design, sequence-function relationships, de novo enzyme design, experimental evolution, mutation effect prediction, enzyme stability, catalytic activity prediction, biocatalysts

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