Back

Protein language models learn underlying mutation biases alongside fitness landscapes

MacLean, O. A.; Lamb, K.; Mojsiejczuk, L.; Lytras, S.; Yuan, K.; Hughes, J.; Robertson, D. L.

2026-07-09 evolutionary biology
10.64898/2026.07.06.736753 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Protein language models (PLMs) score the effects of amino acid replacements as pseudo-probabilities, which are widely utilised to map protein fitness landscapes. However, because their training data relies on natural amino acid sequences, these models conflate protein structural constraints with nucleotide mutation biases and codon accessibility. Using the rapid emergence of the divergent influenza A H3N2 K lineage as a stress test, we investigate how base PLMs (ESM-2 and ESM-C) versus fine-tuned versions of these models capture mutational processes. We systematically implement a parameter sweep to explicitly couple (or decouple) empirical nucleotide mutational supply from PLM-assessed amino acid substitution pseudo-probabilities across evolutionary forecasting tasks. We find that base PLMs implicitly learn generic nucleotide-level mutational constraints, an effect strongly amplified by virus-specific fine-tuning. Incorporating explicit mutational accessibility significantly improves the binary prediction of observed amino acid changes. Conversely, when predicting the final circulating frequency of variants that have already emerged, adding mutational supply degrades performance, confirming that selection dominates post-emergence dynamics. Additionally, we perform amino-acid-level epistatic scanning to investigate protein structural constraints in the context of genetic background. This indicates the improbable antigenic substitution I160K is dependent on co-occurring S144N and N158D mutations in the H3N2 K lineage. Ultimately, current PLM pseudo-probabilities are a composite metric that conflates protein structural fitness with historical biases in mutational supply. Explicitly decoupling these independent evolutionary processes optimises predictive accuracy for real-world pathogen forecasting and isolates pure protein fitness for synthetic design pipelines.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 1%
18.3%
2
Virus Evolution
155 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
11.8%
3
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 19%
8.8%
4
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 6%
6.7%
5
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
238 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
5.4%
50% of probability mass above
6
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 21%
4.8%
7
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 30%
4.0%
8
Molecular Biology and Evolution
542 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
9
Cell Systems
201 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
10
Molecular Systems Biology
162 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
2.4%
11
PRX Life
42 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.4%
12
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 21%
1.7%
13
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 17%
1.5%
14
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 53%
1.3%
15
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
235 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
16
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
393 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
17
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 26%
1.1%
18
G3: Genes|Genomes|Genetics
35 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
19
BMC Evolutionary Biology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
20
Epidemics
116 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
21
Genome Biology
637 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.0%
22
GENETICS
483 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
23
Bioinformatics
1204 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.6%
24
PLOS Pathogens
820 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.6%
25
Systematic Biology
144 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%