Navigating the unstructured by evaluating alphafold’s efficacy in predicting missing residues and structural disorder in proteins
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
The study investigated regions with undefined structures, known as “missing” segments in X-ray crystallography and cryo-electron microscopy (Cryo-EM) data, by assessing their predicted structural confidence and disorder scores. Utilizing a comprehensive dataset from the Protein Data Bank (PDB), residues were categorized as “modeled”, “hard missing” and “soft missing” based on their visibility in structural datasets. Key features were determined, including a confidence score predicted local distance difference test (pLDDT) from AlphaFold2, an advanced structural prediction tool, and a disorder score from IUPred, a traditional disorder prediction method. To enhance prediction performance for unstructured residues, we employed a Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) model, integrating both scores with amino acid sequences. Notable patterns such as composition, region lengths and prediction scores were observed in unstructured residues and regions identified through structural experiments over our studied period. Our findings also indicate that “hard missing” residues often align with low confidence scores, whereas “soft missing” residues exhibit dynamic behavior that can complicate predictions. The incorporation of pLDDT, IUPred scores, and sequence data into the LSTM model has improved the differentiation between structured and unstructured residues, particularly for shorter unstructured regions. This research elucidates the relationship between established computational predictions and experimental structural data, enhancing our ability to target structurally significant areas for research and guiding experimental designs toward functionally relevant regions.
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.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 74 · Cited by 4
- Authors
- Zheng, S.
- Affiliations
- ShanghaiTech University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Zheng, Sen
- ORCID
- Zheng, Sen
- Venue
- PLOS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2025-03-25
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- e0313812
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC11936262
- OpenAlex
- W4408818695
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 74
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2
- FWCI
- 1.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Enzyme Structure and Function
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
- Keywords
- protein structural disorder, AlphaFold2, pLDDT, unstructured regions, protein structure prediction, X-ray crystallography, cryo-electron microscopy
- MeSH terms
- Amino Acid Sequence, Models, Molecular, Protein Conformation, Proteins, Protein Folding, Crystallography, X-Ray, Computational Biology, Cryoelectron Microscopy, Databases, Protein, Intrinsically Disordered Proteins
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