The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Prediction of Protein Ion-Ligand Binding Sites with ELECTRA
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.3390/molecules28196793 · Paper page
Abstract
Interactions between proteins and ions are essential for various biological functions like structural stability, metabolism, and signal transport. Given that more than half of all proteins bind to ions, it becomes crucial to identify ion-binding sites. Accurate identification of protein-ion binding sites helps us to understand proteins’ biological functions and plays a significant role in drug discovery. While several computational approaches have been proposed, this remains a challenging problem due to the small size and high versatility of metals and acid radicals. In this study, we propose IonPred, a sequence-based approach that employs ELECTRA (Efficiently Learning an Encoder that Classifies Token Replacements Accurately) to predict ion binding sites using only raw protein sequences. We successfully fine-tuned our pretrained model to predict the binding sites for nine metal ions (Zn2+, Cu2+, Fe2+, Fe3+, Ca2+, Mg2+, Mn2+, Na+, and K+) and four acid radical ion ligands (CO32−, SO42−, PO43−, NO2−). IonPred surpassed six current state-of-the-art tools by over 44.65% and 28.46% respectively in F1 score and MCC when compared on an independent test dataset. Our method is more computationally efficient than existing tools producing prediction results for a hundred sequences for a specific ion in under ten minutes.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 · Cited by 43,764
Flagged first, then by citations
Metadata
- Authors
- Essien, C., Jiang, L., Wang, D., & Xu, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Missouri (US)
- Corresponding author
- Xu, Dong
- Venue
- Molecules
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2023-08-29
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 19
- Pages
- 6793-6793
- ISSN
- 1420-3049 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC10574437
- OpenAlex
- W4387056124
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3
- FWCI
- 0.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Molecules (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Preprints.org (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- University of Missouri
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R35GM126985)
- Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Drug Discovery › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
- Keywords
- metal ion binding, Electra, sequence-based prediction, metal-protein interactions, NO2, drug discovery
- MeSH terms
- Binding Sites, Ions, Ligands, Metals, Protein Binding, 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