SNPdryad: predicting deleterious non-synonymous human SNPs using only orthologous protein sequences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: The recent advances in genome sequencing have revealed an abundance of non-synonymous polymorphisms among human individuals; subsequently, it is of immense interest and importance to predict whether such substitutions are functional neutral or have deleterious effects. The accuracy of such prediction algorithms depends on the quality of the multiple-sequence alignment, which is used to infer how an amino acid substitution is tolerated at a given position. Because of the scarcity of orthologous protein sequences in the past, the existing prediction algorithms all include sequences of protein paralogs in the alignment, which can dilute the conservation signal and affect prediction accuracy. However, we believe that, with the sequencing of a large number of mammalian genomes, it is now feasible to include only protein orthologs in the alignment and improve the prediction performance. RESULTS: We have developed a novel prediction algorithm, named SNPdryad, which only includes protein orthologs in building a multiple sequence alignment. Among many other innovations, SNPdryad uses different conservation scoring schemes and uses Random Forest as a classifier. We have tested SNPdryad on several datasets. We found that SNPdryad consistently outperformed other methods in several performance metrics, which is attributed to the exclusion of paralogous sequence. We have run SNPdryad on the complete human proteome, generating prediction scores for all the possible amino acid substitutions. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The algorithm and the prediction results can be accessed from the Web site: http://snps.ccbr.utoronto.ca:8080/SNPdryad/ CONTACT: Zhaolei.Zhang@utoronto.ca Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".