A predicted structural interactome reveals binding interference from intrinsically disordered regions
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Proteins function through dynamic interactions with other proteins in cells, forming complex networks fundamental to cellular processes. While high-resolution and high-throughput methods have significantly advanced our understanding of how proteins interact with each other, the molecular details of many important protein-protein interactions are still poorly characterized, especially in non-mammalian species, including Drosophila . Recent advancements in deep learning techniques have enabled the prediction of molecular details in various cellular pathways at the network level. In this study, we used AlphaFold2 Multimer to examine and predict protein-protein interactions from both physical and functional datasets in Drosophila . We found that functional associations contribute significantly to high-confidence predictions. Through detailed structural analysis, we also found the importance of intrinsically disordered regions in the predicted high-confidence interactions. Our study highlights the importance of disordered regions in protein-protein interactions and demonstrates the importance of incorporating functional interactions in predicting physical interactions between proteins. We further compiled an interactive web interface to present these predictions, facilitating functional exploration, comparative analysis, and the generation of mechanistic hypotheses for future studies.
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
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.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 63 · Cited by 5
- Authors
- Peng, J., & Zhao, L.
- Affiliations
- Rockefeller University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Zhao, Li
- ORCID
- Venue
- PLOS Computational Biology
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2026-01-22
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- e1013899
- ISSN
- 1553-734X (ISSN-L)
- 1553-7358
- PMC
- PMC12854418
- OpenAlex
- W7125478495
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 63
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5
- FWCI
- 10.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- new_version (2026-01-29)
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- PLoS Computational Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R35GM133780)
- Paul G. Allen Frontiers Group (Allen Distinguished Investigator Award)
- the Shapiro-Silverberg Fund for the Advancement of Translational Research
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
- Keywords
- protein-protein interaction, intrinsically disordered regions, AlphaFold2-Multimer, Drosophila
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