Benchmarking computational tools for de novo motif discovery
Simonetti, L.; Ivarsson, Y.; Davey, N. E.
Show abstract
BackgroundOver the past twenty years, numerous motif discovery bioinformatic tools have been developed for discovering short linear motifs (SLiMs) from high-throughput experimental data on domain-peptide interactions. However, these tools are generally evaluated individually and mostly using synthetic data that do not accurately capture the motif context observed within proteomic data. Consequently, it is unclear how these tools perform in real-world use cases and how they perform compared to each other. ResultsHere, we benchmarked five motif discovery tools and seven general sequence alignment tools on their capacity to find SLiMs. For this purpose we have built MEP-Bench, a benchmarking dataset of peptides of varying complexity from curated SLiM instances from the Eukaryotic Linear Motif database. MEP-Bench allows tools to be tested for the effect of dataset size, peptide length, background noise level and motif complexity on motif discovery. The main metric used to compare all tools was the percentage of correctly aligned SLiM containing peptides. Two motif discovery tools (DEME and SLiMFinder) and a sequence alignment tool (Opal) outperformed the rest of the tools when benchmarked with this metric, averaging over 70% correctly aligned motif-containing peptides. The performance of the motif discovery tools and Opal were not affected by the sizes of the datasets. However, increasing peptide lengths and noise levels decreased all tools performances. While all tools performed well for N-/C-terminal motifs, for low-complexity motifs only DEME and SLiMFinder returned correctly aligned motifs for 50% or more of the datasets. ConclusionsThis study highlights DEME, SLiMFinder and Opal as the best performing tools for finding motifs in short peptides, and it indicates experimental parameters that should be considered given the limitations of the available tools. However, there is room for improvement, as no tool was able to identify all motif types. We propose that MEP-Bench can serve as a valuable resource for the SLiM community to compare new motif discovery methods with those benchmarked here.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- VIQoR: a web service for Visually supervised protein Inference and protein Quantification 94%
- Investigating the human and non-obese diabetic mouse MHC class II immunopeptidome using protein language modelling 93%
- TemStaPro: protein thermostability prediction using sequence representations from protein language models 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- ShiftSCAN, a program that predicts potential alternative sources of mass spectrometry-derived peptides, improves the accuracy of studies on novel amino acid sequences 92%
- Getting to know each other: PPIMem, a novel approach for predicting transmembrane protein-protein complexes 92%
- Uniquome: Construction and Decoding of a Novel Proteomic Atlas that Contains New Peptide Entities 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Predicting protein-membrane interfaces of peripheral membrane proteins using ensemble machine learning 92%
- AI-Guided Discovery and Optimization of Antimicrobial Peptides Through Species-Aware Language Model 92%
- PLMFit : Benchmarking Transfer Learning with Protein Language Models for Protein Engineering 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.