Back

plantiSMASH 2.0: improvements to detection, annotation, and prioritization of plant biosynthetic gene clusters

Del Pup, E.; Owen, C.; Luo, Z.; Augustijn, H. E.; Draisma, A.; Polturak, G.; Kautsar, S. A.; Osbourn, A.; van der Hooft, J. J. J.; Medema, M. H.

2025-10-28 bioinformatics
10.1101/2025.10.28.683968 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Plants produce bioactive compounds as part of their specialized metabolism, with applications in medicine, agriculture, and nutrition. The biosynthesis of a growing number of these specialized metabolites has been found to be encoded in biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs), creating increasing demand for genome mining tools to automate their detection. plantiSMASH enables the identification of putative plant BGCs through a rule-based approach, available via both command-line and web interfaces. Here, we present plantiSMASH 2.0 (https://plantismash.bioinformatics.nl/), a major update that expands and improves the original framework with revised and additional BGC detection rules (now supporting 12 BGC types), substrate prediction for selected enzyme families, and regulatory analysis through transcription factor binding site detection. The updated plantiSMASH 2.0 database includes 30,423 putative BGCs across 430 genomes. Together, these improvements make plantiSMASH 2.0 a powerful and comprehensive platform for the detection and characterization of plant biosynthetic pathways, supporting and accelerating research in plant specialized metabolism and plant natural product discovery.

Published in Journal of Molecular Biology · training set

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMC Genomics
○ 406 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
10.4%
Similar papers in this journal
2
GigaScience
◐ 212 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.7%
Similar papers in this journal
3
BMC Bioinformatics
○ 457 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.6%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Plant Communications
○ 36 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.3%
Similar papers in this journal
5
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.7%
6
Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics
188 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.7%
7
Bioinformatics
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 5%
4.2%
8
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 32%
4.2%
9
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
◐ 242 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.3%
50% of probability mass above
10
BMC Plant Biology
○ 57 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.2%
11
Frontiers in Plant Science
○ 256 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.4%
12
Genome Biology
○ 637 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.3%
13
Horticulture Research
◐ 47 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.3%
14
Genes
○ 144 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
15
New Phytologist
○ 346 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
16
Briefings in Bioinformatics
◐ 354 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
17
Nucleic Acids Research
◐ 1281 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.7%
18
BMC Research Notes
○ 33 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.6%
19
Plant Physiology
◐ 238 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
20
Plant Biotechnology Journal
○ 64 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.5%
21
The Plant Journal
○ 215 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
22
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
23
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 61%
1.3%
24
Bioinformatics Advances
◐ 203 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
25
The Plant Genome
○ 57 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.0%
26
Gigabyte
● 62 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
27
Microbial Genomics
● 225 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
28
The Plant Cell
◐ 161 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
29
Physiologia Plantarum
○ 39 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
30
Plant Direct
○ 95 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%

"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.