Cited by 6Protein Structure and DynamicsMachine Learning in BioinformaticsGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

Impact of phylogeny on structural contact inference from protein sequence data

Open access
Dietler, Nicola, Lupo, Umberto, Bitbol, Anne-Florence·2023·Journal of The Royal Society Interface

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Local and global inference methods have been developed to infer structural contacts from multiple sequence alignments of homologous proteins. They rely on correlations in amino acid usage at contacting sites. Because homologous proteins share a common ancestry, their sequences also feature phylogenetic correlations, which can impair contact inference. We investigate this effect by generating controlled synthetic data from a minimal model where the importance of contacts and of phylogeny can be tuned. We demonstrate that global inference methods, specifically Potts models, are more resilient to phylogenetic correlations than local methods, based on covariance or mutual information. This holds whether or not phylogenetic corrections are used, and may explain the success of global methods. We analyse the roles of selection strength and of phylogenetic relatedness. We show that sites that mutate early in the phylogeny yield false positive contacts. We consider natural data and realistic synthetic data, and our findings generalize to these cases. Our results highlight the impact of phylogeny on contact prediction from protein sequences and illustrate the interplay between the rich structure of biological data and inference.

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 · 10.1098/rsif.2022.0707

Cites

7 of 7 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

Authors
Dietler, N., Lupo, U., & Bitbol, A.-F.
Affiliations
SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics (CH)
Corresponding author
Bitbol, Anne-Florence
Venue
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
Published
2023-02
Volume
20
Issue
199
Pages
20220707-20220707
ISSN
1742-5662 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4319461138
Cited by
6
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1
FWCI
0.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of The Royal Society Interface (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
H2020 European Research Council (851173)
Topics
  • 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
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Keywords
phylogenetic correlation, homologous proteins, Potts model, covariance, mutual information, phylogenetic correction, selection strength, multiple sequence alignment
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Amino Acid Sequence, Phylogeny, Proteins, Sequence Alignment

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