PreprintCited by 1Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesProtein Structure and DynamicsMachine Learning in Bioinformatics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Much ado about nothing: Modelling amino acid replacement with predicted protein structures

Open access

Preprint — published as 10.1093/bioinformatics/btag188

Abstract

Substitution matrices like BLOSUM62 model the likelihood of replacement of amino acids in evolution. Substitution matrices are used in protein sequence alignment tasks. Since the introduction of BLOSUM62 over three decades ago, many matrices have been released. Yet, to date, no effort uses large amounts of 3D structures predicted by AlphaFold. Here, we define AFSM, the AlphaFold Substitution Matrix derived from over 20,000 predicted 3D structures following the BLOSUM methodology. We benchmark AFSM against BLOSUM62 and 16 other matrices on five tasks in multiple sequence alignment (MSA) and protein homology search. Our analysis surprisingly reveals that all matrices perform similarly. Only when there are few sequences in an MSA, then BLOSUM62 and AFSM perform better than using no matrix. This suggests that substitution matrices were most beneficial when there was little sequence data. We corroborate this argument by showing that embeddings, which are computed from billions of sequences, perform better than substitution matrices, when sequence data is sparse. Taken together, this suggests that structural data does not improve BLOSUM62. But increased sequence data makes extrapolation with substitution matrices obsolete. Nonetheless, BLOSUM62 continues to capture chemists’ intuition on amino acids by providing numerical values implicitly reflecting physicochemical properties, and it remains indispensable for direct comparison of two 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 · 10.64898/2025.12.05.692347

Cites

1 of 1 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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Margaret O. Dayhoff , Richard M. Schwartz , and Barbara C. Orcutt . A model of evolutionary change in proteins. In Atlas of Protein Sequence and Structure, pages 345–358. National Biomedical Research Foundation, Washington, DC, volume 5, supplement 3 edition, 1978.
  2. 10.1089/10665270050514918 · DOI
  3. 10.1093/protein/7.11.1323 · DOI
  4. 10.1186/s12859-016-1060-3 · DOI
  5. 10.1002/prot.22458 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/S0022-2836(77)80200-3 · DOI
  7. 10.1093/protein/13.8.545 · DOI
  8. 10.1002/prot.26050 · DOI
  9. 10.1186/s12859-017-1703-z · DOI
  10. 10.1093/nar/gkaa913 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1093/nar/gkab1061 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1371/journal.pone.0018093 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1093/nar/gkae1082 · DOI
  14. 10.1186/1471-2105-10-396 · DOI
  15. 10.1186/s40064-016-3019-2 · DOI
  16. 10.1093/protein/12.2.85 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1093/nar/gkg062 · DOI
  18. 10.1093/nar/gkz1064 · DOI
  19. 10.1073/pnas.89.22.10915 · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.1109/TPAMI.2021.3095381 · DOI · Paper page
  21. 10.1126/science.185.4154.862 · DOI
  22. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btae687 · DOI
  23. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btad786 · DOI · Paper page

Metadata

Authors
Buschmann, L., Bolz, S. N., el-Hendi, F., Malekian, N., & Schroeder, M.
Affiliations
  • Center for Scalable Data Analytics and Artificial Intelligence (DE)
  • Biotechnologisches Zentrum (DE)
Corresponding author
Schroeder, Michael
Venue
Bioinformatics
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2025-12-09
Volume
42
Issue
5
ISSN
1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7156236789
Cited by
1
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1
FWCI
2.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioinformatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • BMBF
  • Ebira
  • scads.ai
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • 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
Keywords
amino acid substitution matrices, BLOSUM62, AlphaFold, predicted protein structures, multiple sequence alignment, protein homology search, sequence embeddings, protein evolution
MeSH terms
Amino Acid Sequence, Amino Acids, Models, Molecular, Protein Conformation, Proteins, Sequence Alignment, Computational Biology, Amino Acid Substitution, Sequence Analysis, Protein

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