MIBiG 2.0: a repository for biosynthetic gene clusters of known function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fueled by the explosion of (meta)genomic data, genome mining of specialized metabolites has become a major technology for drug discovery and studying microbiome ecology. In these efforts, computational tools like antiSMASH have played a central role through the analysis of Biosynthetic Gene Clusters (BGCs). Thousands of candidate BGCs from microbial genomes have been identified and stored in public databases. Interpreting the function and novelty of these predicted BGCs requires comparison with a well-documented set of BGCs of known function. The MIBiG (Minimum Information about a Biosynthetic Gene Cluster) Data Standard and Repository was established in 2015 to enable curation and storage of known BGCs. Here, we present MIBiG 2.0, which encompasses major updates to the schema, the data, and the online repository itself. Over the past five years, 851 new BGCs have been added. Additionally, we performed extensive manual data curation of all entries to improve the annotation quality of our repository. We also redesigned the data schema to ensure the compliance of future annotations. Finally, we improved the user experience by adding new features such as query searches and a statistics page, and enabled direct link-outs to chemical structure databases. The repository is accessible online at https://mibig.secondarymetabolites.org/.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.042 |
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".