High‐throughput prediction of disordered moonlighting regions in protein sequences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intrinsically disordered regions lack stable structure in their native conformation but are nevertheless functional and highly abundant, particularly in Eukaryotes. Disordered moonlighting regions (DMRs) are intrinsically disordered regions that carry out multiple functions. DMRs are different from moonlighting proteins that could be structured and that are annotated at the whole-protein level. DMRs cannot be identified by current predictors of functions of disorder that focus on specific functions rather than multifunctional regions. We conceptualized, designed and empirically assessed first-of-its-kind sequence-based predictor of DMRs, DMRpred. This computational tool outputs propensity for being in a DMR for each residue in an input protein sequence. We developed novel amino acid indices that quantify propensities for functions relevant to DMRs and used evolutionary conservation, putative solvent accessibility and intrinsic disorder derived from the input sequence to build a rich profile that is suitable to accurately predict DMRs. We processed this profile to derive innovative features that we input into a Random Forest model to generate the predictions. Empirical assessment shows that DMRpred generates accurate predictions with area under receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.86 and accuracy = 82%. These results are significantly better than the closest alternative approaches that rely on sequence alignment, evolutionary conservation and putative disorder and disorder functions. Analysis of abundance of putative DMRs in the human proteome reveals that as many as 25% of proteins may have long >30 residues) DMRs. A webserver implementation of DMRpred is available at http://biomine.cs.vcu.edu/servers/DMRpred/.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".