Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 89

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Combining genetic algorithm with machine learning strategies for designing potent antimicrobial peptides

Boone, Kyle, Wisdom, Cate, Camarda, Kyle, Spencer, Paulette, Tamerler, Candan·2021·BMC Bioinformatics

Abstract

Background: Current methods in machine learning provide approaches for solving challenging, multiple constraint design problems. While deep learning and related neural networking methods have state-of-the-art performance, their vulnerability in decision making processes leading to irrational outcomes is a major concern for their implementation. With the rising antibiotic resistance, antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have increasingly gained attention as novel therapeutic agents. This challenging design problem requires peptides which meet the multiple constraints of limiting drug-resistance in bacteria, preventing secondary infections from imbalanced microbial flora, and avoiding immune system suppression. AMPs offer a promising, bioinspired design space to targeting antimicrobial activity, but their versatility also requires the curated selection from a combinatorial sequence space. This space is too large for brute-force methods or currently known rational design approaches outside of machine learning. While there has been progress in using the design space to more effectively target AMP activity, a widely applicable approach has been elusive. The lack of transparency in machine learning has limited the advancement of scientific knowledge of how AMPs are related among each other, and the lack of general applicability for fully rational approaches has limited a broader understanding of the design space. Methods: Here we combined an evolutionary method with rough set theory, a transparent machine learning approach, for designing antimicrobial peptides (AMPs). Our method achieves the customization of AMPs using supervised learning boundaries. Our system employs in vitro bacterial assays to measure fitness, codon-representation of peptides to gain flexibility of sequence selection in DNA-space with a genetic algorithm and machine learning to further accelerate the process. Results: We use supervised machine learning and a genetic algorithm to find a peptide active against S. epidermidis, a common bacterial strain for implant infections, with an improved aggregation propensity average for an improved ease of synthesis. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that AMP design can be customized to maintain activity and simplify production. To our knowledge, this is the first time when codon-based genetic algorithms combined with rough set theory methods is used for computational search on peptide sequences.

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 · 10.1186/s12859-021-04156-x

Cites

9 of 9 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

Show all 9 references

Research works printed but not linked: 66

  1. Liu Z, Luo P, Wang X, Tang X. Deep learning face attributes in the wild. In: Proc IEEE Int Conf Comput Vis: 2015. 3730–3738. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Xu J. Distance-based protein folding powered by deep learning. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019;116:16856–65. · DOI · Paper page
  3. Spanig S, Heider D. Encodings and models for antimicrobial peptide classification for multi-resistant pathogens. BioData Min. 2019;12:7. · DOI
  4. Abbas Z, Burney A. A survey of software packages used for rough set analysis. J Comput Commun. 2016;4:10. · doi:10.4236/jcc.2016.49002
  5. Clark PG, Grzymala-Busse JW, Rzasa W. A comparison of two MLEM2 rule induction algorithms extended to probabilistic approximations. J Intell Inf Syst. 2016;47:515–29. · doi:10.1007/s10844-015-0385-0
  6. Al-Tawfiq JA, Laxminarayan R, Mendelson M. How should we respond to the emergence of plasmid-mediated colistin resistance in humans and animals? Int J Infect Dis. 2017;54:77–84. · DOI
  7. Liu YY, Wang Y, Walsh TR, Yi LX, Zhang R, Spencer J, Doi Y, Tian G, Dong B, Huang X, et al. Emergence of plasmid-mediated colistin resistance mechanism MCR-1 in animals and human beings in China: a microbiological and molecular biological study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16:161–8. · DOI · Paper page
  8. Strzepa A, Lobo FM, Majewska-Szczepanik M, Szczepanik M. Antibiotics and autoimmune and allergy diseases: causative factor or treatment? Int Immunopharmacol. 2018;65:328–41. · DOI
  9. Shelomi M, Jacobs C, Vilcinskas A, Vogel H. The unique antimicrobial peptide repertoire of stick insects. Dev Comp Immunol. 2020;103:103471. · DOI
  10. Kim CH, Go HJ, Oh HY, Park JB, Lee TK, Seo JK, Elphick MR, Park NG. Identification of a novel antimicrobial peptide from the sea star Patiria pectinifera. Dev Comp Immunol. 2018;86:203–13. · DOI
  11. Zasloff M. Antimicrobial peptides of multicellular organisms: my perspective. In: Antimicrobial peptides. Springer; 2019: 3–6. · DOI · Paper page
  12. Choi H, Rangarajan N, Weisshaar JC. Lights, camera, action! Antimicrobial peptide mechanisms imaged in space and time. Trends Microbiol. 2016;24:111–22. · DOI
  13. Simpson DH, Hapeshi A, Rogers NJ, Brabec V, Clarkson GJ, Fox DJ, Hrabina O, Kay GL, King AK, Malina J, et al. Metallohelices that kill Gram-negative pathogens using intracellular antimicrobial peptide pathways. Chem Sci. 2019;10:9708–20. · DOI
  14. Yoshida M, Hinkley T, Tsuda S, Abul-Haija YM, McBurney RT, Kulikov V, Mathieson JS, Reyes SG, Castro MD, Cronin L. Using evolutionary algorithms and machine learning to explore sequence space for the discovery of antimicrobial peptides. Chem. 2018;4:533–43. · DOI · Paper page
  15. Bechinger B, Gorr SU. Antimicrobial peptides: mechanisms of action and resistance. J Dent Res. 2017;96:254–60. · DOI · Paper page
  16. Afshar A, Yuca E, Wisdom C, Alenezi H, Ahmed J, Tamerler C, Edirisinghe M. Next-generation antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) incorporated nanofibre wound dressings. Med Dev Sens. 2021;4:10144. · DOI
  17. Xie SX, Boone K, VanOosten SK, Yuca E, Song LY, Ge XP, Ye Q, Spencer P, Tamerler C. Peptide mediated antimicrobial dental adhesive system. Appl Sci (Basel). 2019;9:557–75. · DOI
  18. Yazici H, O’Neil MB, Kacar T, Wilson BR, Oren EE, Sarikaya M, Tamerler C. Engineered chimeric peptides as antimicrobial surface coating agents towards infection-free implants. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2016;8:5070–81. · DOI · Paper page
  19. Wisdom C, VanOosten SK, Boone KW, Khvostenko D, Arnold PM, Snead ML, Tamerler C. Controlling the biomimetic implant interface: Modulating antimicrobial activity by spacer design. J Mol Eng Mater. 2016;4:1640005. · DOI
  20. Yucesoy DT, Hnilova M, Boone K, Arnold PM, Snead ML, Tamerler C. Chimeric peptides as implant functionalization agents for titanium alloy implants with antimicrobial properties. JOM. 2015;67:754–66. · DOI
  21. Xie S-X, Song L, Yuca E, Boone K, Sarikaya R, VanOosten SK, Misra A, Ye Q, Spencer P, Tamerler C. Antimicrobial peptide–polymer conjugates for dentistry. ACS Appl Polym Mater. 2020;2:1134–44. · DOI
  22. Wisdom EC, Zhou Y, Chen C, Tamerler C, Snead ML. Mitigation of peri-implantitis by rational design of bifunctional peptides with antimicrobial properties. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2019;6:2682–95. · DOI
  23. Lei J, Sun L, Huang S, Zhu C, Li P, He J, Mackey V, Coy DH, He Q. The antimicrobial peptides and their potential clinical applications. Am J Transl Res. 2019;11:3919.
  24. Dishman AF, Tyler R, Fox J, Lee M, de Anda J, Lee E, Wong GC, Volkman B. Evolution and functional advantages of protein metamorphosis. Biophys J. 2020;118:24a. · doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2019.11.310
  25. Wang G, Li X, Wang Z. APD3: the antimicrobial peptide database as a tool for research and education. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44:D1087-1093. · DOI · Paper page
  26. Fan L, Sun J, Zhou M, Zhou J, Lao X, Zheng H, Xu H. DRAMP: a comprehensive data repository of antimicrobial peptides. Sci Rep. 2016;6:1–7. · DOI · Paper page
  27. Mai S, Mauger MT, Niu LN, Barnes JB, Kao S, Bergeron BE, Ling JQ, Tay FR. Potential applications of antimicrobial peptides and their mimics in combating caries and pulpal infections. Acta Biomater. 2017;49:16–35. · DOI
  28. Czyzewski AM, Jenssen H, Fjell CD, Waldbrook M, Chongsiriwatana NP, Yuen E, Hancock RE, Barron AE. In Vivo, in vitro, and in silico characterization of peptoids as antimicrobial agents. PLoS One. 2016;11:e 0135961. · DOI
  29. Rotem S, Mor A. Antimicrobial peptide mimics for improved therapeutic properties. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2009;1788:1582–92. · DOI · Paper page
  30. Xu L, Shao C, Li G, Shan A, Chou S, Wang J, Ma Q, Dong N. Conversion of broad-spectrum antimicrobial peptides into species-specific antimicrobials capable of precisely targeting pathogenic bacteria. Sci Rep. 2020;10:944. · DOI
  31. Porto WF, Fensterseifer ICM, Ribeiro SM, Franco OL. Joker: An algorithm to insert patterns into sequences for designing antimicrobial peptides. Biochim Biophys Acta Gen Subj. 2018;1862:2043–52. · DOI
  32. Dua M, Barbará D, Shehu A. Exploring deep neural network architectures: A case study on improving antimicrobial peptide recognition. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference: 2020. 182–191.
  33. Veltri D, Kamath U, Shehu A. Improving recognition of antimicrobial peptides and target selectivity through machine learning and genetic programming. IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform. 2017;14:300–13. · DOI
  34. Cherkasov A, Hilpert K, Jenssen H, Fjell CD, Waldbrook M, Mullaly SC, Volkmer R, Hancock RE. Use of artificial intelligence in the design of small peptide antibiotics effective against a broad spectrum of highly antibiotic-resistant superbugs. ACS Chem Biol. 2009;4:65–74. · DOI · Paper page
  35. Boone K, Abedin F, Anwar MR, Camarda KV. Molecular design in the pharmaceutical industries. Comput Aided Chem Eng. 2017;39:221–38. · DOI
  36. Ng LY, Chong FK, Chemmangattuvalappil NG. Challenges and opportunities in computer-aided molecular design. Comput Chem Eng. 2015;81:115–29. · DOI
  37. Lin B, Chavali S, Camarda K, Miller DC. Computer-aided molecular design using Tabu search. Comput Chem Eng. 2005;29:337–47. · doi:10.1016/j.compchemeng.2004.10.008
  38. Fjell CD, Jenssen H, Cheung WA, Hancock RE, Cherkasov A. Optimization of antibacterial peptides by genetic algorithms and cheminformatics. Chem Biol Drug Des. 2011;77:48–56. · DOI
  39. Veltri D, Kamath U, Shehu A. Deep learning improves antimicrobial peptide recognition. Bioinformatics. 2018;34:2740–7. · DOI · Paper page
  40. Spänig S, Heider D. Encodings and models for antimicrobial peptide classification for multi-resistant pathogens. BioData Mining. 2019;12:7. · DOI
  41. Boone K, Camarda K, Spencer P, Tamerler C. Antimicrobial peptide similarity and classification through rough set theory using physicochemical boundaries. BMC Bioinformatics. 2018;19:1–10. · DOI
  42. Conchillo-Sole O, de Groot NS, Aviles FX, Vendrell J, Daura X, Ventura S. AGGRESCAN: a server for the prediction and evaluation of “hot spots” of aggregation in polypeptides. BMC Bioinformatics. 2007;8:65. · DOI · Paper page
  43. Haney EF, Mansour SC, Hancock RE. Antimicrobial peptides: an introduction. In: Antimicrobial peptides. Springer; 2017: 3–22. · DOI · Paper page
  44. Li Z, Xu X, Meng L, Zhang Q, Cao L, Li W, Wu Y, Cao Z. Hp1404, a new antimicrobial peptide from the scorpion Heterometrus petersii. PLoS One. 2014;9:e 97539. · DOI
  45. Gertz EM, Yu YK, Agarwala R, Schaffer AA, Altschul SF. Composition-based statistics and translated nucleotide searches: improving the TBLASTN module of BLAST. BMC Biol. 2006;4:41. · DOI · Paper page
  46. Brand GD, Magalhaes MTQ, Tinoco MLP, Aragao FJL, Nicoli J, Kelly SM, Cooper A, Bloch C. Probing protein sequences as sources for encrypted antimicrobial peptides. Plos One. 2012;7:e45848. · DOI
  47. Korichi M, Gerbaud V, Floquet P, Meniai AH, Nacef S, Joulia X. Computer aided aroma design I-molecular knowledge framework. Chem Eng Process. 2008;47:1902–11. · doi:10.1016/j.cep.2008.02.008
  48. Karami Y, Khakzad H, Arab S, Fathy M, Shirazi H. Protein structure prediction using bio-inspired algorithm: a review. In: Artificial Intelligence and Signal Processing (AISP), 2012 16th CSI International Symposium on: 2–3 May 2012; 2012. 201–206. · doi:10.1109/aisp.2012.6313744
  49. Lazar GA, Desjarlais JR, Handel TM. De novo design of the hydrophobic core of ubiquitin. Protein Sci. 1997;6:1167–78. · DOI · Paper page
  50. Krivov GG, Shapovalov MV, Dunbrack RL Jr. Improved prediction of protein side-chain conformations with SCWRL4. Proteins. 2009;77:778–95. · DOI · Paper page
  51. Desjarlais JR, Handel TM. De novo design of the hydrophobic cores of proteins. Protein Sci. 1995;4:2006–18. · DOI · Paper page
  52. Yeh CT, Brunette TJ, Baker D, McIntosh-Smith S, Parmeggiani F. Elfin: An algorithm for the computational design of custom three-dimensional structures from modular repeat protein building blocks. J Struct Biol. 2018;201:100–7. · DOI
  53. Movahedi M, Zare-Mirakabad F, Arab SS. Evaluating the accuracy of protein design using native secondary sub-structures. BMC Bioinformatics. 2016;17:353. · DOI
  54. Brunk E, Perez MAS, Athri P, Rothlisberger U. Genetic-algorithm-based optimization of a peptidic scaffold for sequestration and hydration of CO2. ChemPhysChem. 2016;17:3831–5. · DOI
  55. Opuu V, Silvert M, Simonson T. Computational design of fully overlapping coding schemes for protein pairs and triplets. Sci Rep. 2017;7:15873. · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-16221-8
  56. Lorenzo-Ginori JV, Rodriguez-Fuentes A, Abalo RG, Rodriguez RS. Digital signal processing in the analysis of genomic sequences. Curr Bioinform. 2009;4:28–40. · doi:10.2174/157489309787158134
  57. Giannerini S, Gonzalez DL, Rosa R. DNA, dichotomic classes and frame synchronization: a quasi-crystal framework. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2012;370:2987–3006.
  58. Lebre S, Gascuel O. The combinatorics of overlapping genes. J Theor Biol. 2017;415:90–101. · DOI
  59. Patel S, Stott IP, Bhakoo M, Elliott P. Patenting computer-designed peptides. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 1998;12:543–56. · doi:10.1023/a:1008095802767
  60. Jones DT. De-novo protein design using pairwise potentials and a genetic algorithm. Protein Sci. 1994;3:567–74. · DOI
  61. Maximova T, Plaku E, Shehu A. Computing transition paths in multiple-basin proteins with a probabilistic roadmap algorithm guided by structure data. In: Proceedings (IEEE Int Conf Bioinformatics Biomed): 9–12 Nov. 2015, 2015; 35–42. · doi:10.1109/bibm.2015.7359652
  62. Fjell CD, Hiss JA, Hancock RE, Schneider G. Designing antimicrobial peptides: form follows function. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2012;11:37–51. · DOI · Paper page
  63. Pawlak Z. Rough set theory and its applications to data analysis. Cybern Syst. 1998;29:661–88. · DOI
  64. Kawashima S, Pokarowski P, Pokarowska M, Kolinski A, Katayama T, Kanehisa M. AAindex: amino acid index database, progress report 2008. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008;36:D202-205. · DOI · Paper page
  65. Grzymala-Busse JW, Rzasa W. A local version of the MLEM2 algorithm for rule induction. Fund Inform. 2010;100:99–116.
  66. Xiao X, Wang P, Lin WZ, Jia JH, Chou KC. iAMP-2L: a two-level multi-label classifier for identifying antimicrobial peptides and their functional types. Anal Biochem. 2013;436:168–77. · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 89

Metadata

Authors
Boone, K., Wisdom, C., Camarda, K., Spencer, P., & Tamerler, C.
Venue
BMC Bioinformatics
Published
2021-05-11
Volume
22
Issue
1
ISSN
1471-2105
Cited by
89
References
9
Language
en
Licence
Funders
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (R01DE025476)

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Combining genetic algorithm with machine learning strategies for designing potent antimicrobial peptides. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s12859-021-04156-x
The paper
Boone, K., Wisdom, C., Camarda, K., Spencer, P., & Tamerler, C. (2021). Combining genetic algorithm with machine learning strategies for designing potent antimicrobial peptides. BMC Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-021-04156-x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.