Critical assessment of protein intrinsic disorder prediction

Abstract

Intrinsically disordered proteins, defying the traditional protein structure–function paradigm, are a challenge to study experimentally. Because a large part of our knowledge rests on computational predictions, it is crucial that their accuracy is high. The Critical Assessment of protein Intrinsic Disorder prediction (CAID) experiment was established as a community-based blind test to determine the state of the art in prediction of intrinsically disordered regions and the subset of residues involved in binding. A total of 43 methods were evaluated on a dataset of 646 proteins from DisProt. The best methods use deep learning techniques and notably outperform physicochemical methods. The top disorder predictor has F max = 0.483 on the full dataset and F max = 0.792 following filtering out of bona fide structured regions. Disordered binding regions remain hard to predict, with F max = 0.231. Interestingly, computing times among methods can vary by up to four orders of magnitude.

References 53

1. 1.

   Tompa, P. & Fersht, A. Structure and Function of Intrinsically Disordered Proteins (CRC Press, 2009).

   Not in our library

2. 2.

   Dunker AK, Bondos SE, Huang F, Oldfield CJ. Intrinsically disordered proteins and multicellular organisms. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 2015;37:44-55.

   Not in our library10.1016/j.semcdb.2014.09.025

3. 3.

   Wright PE, Dyson HJ. Intrinsically disordered proteins in cellular signalling and regulation. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2015;16:18-29.

   Not in our library10.1038/nrm3920

4. 4.

   Ward JJ, Sodhi JS, McGuffin LJ, Buxton BF, Jones DT. Prediction and functional analysis of native disorder in proteins from the three kingdoms of life. J. Mol. Biol. 2004;337:635-645.

   Not in our library10.1016/j.jmb.2004.02.002

5. 5.

   Necci M, Piovesan D, Tosatto SCE. Large-scale analysis of intrinsic disorder flavors and associated functions in the protein sequence universe. Protein Sci. 2016;25:2164-2174.

   Not in our library10.1002/pro.3041

6. 6.

   Melo AM, et al. A functional role for intrinsic disorder in the tau–tubulin complex. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2016;113:14336-14341.

   Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1610137113

7. 7.

   Dev KK, Hofele K, Barbieri S, Buchman VL, van der Putten H. Part II: alpha-synuclein and its molecular pathophysiological role in neurodegenerative disease. Neuropharmacology. 2003;45:14-44.

   Not in our library10.1016/s0028-3908(03)00140-0

8. 8.

   Iakoucheva LM, Brown CJ, Lawson JD, Obradović Z, Dunker AK. Intrinsic disorder in cell-signaling and cancer-associated proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 2002;323:573-584.

   Not in our library10.1016/s0022-2836(02)00969-5

9. 9.

   Cheng Y, et al. Rational drug design via intrinsically disordered protein. Trends Biotechnol. 2006;24:435-442.

   Not in our library10.1016/j.tibtech.2006.07.005

10. 10.

    Uversky VN. Intrinsically disordered proteins and novel strategies for drug discovery. Expert Opin. Drug Discov. 2012;7:475-488.

    Not in our library10.1517/17460441.2012.686489

11. 11.

    Mohan A, Uversky VN, Radivojac P. Influence of sequence changes and environment on intrinsically disordered proteins. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2009;5:e1000497.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000497

12. 12.

    Plitzko JM, Schuler B, Selenko P. Structural biology outside the box—inside the cell. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2017;46:110-121.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.sbi.2017.06.007

13. 13.

    Tompa P. Unstructural biology coming of age. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2011;21:419-425.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.sbi.2011.03.012

14. 14.

    Holmstrom ED, Nettels D, Schuler B. Conformational plasticity of hepatitis C virus core protein enables RNA-induced formation of nucleocapsid-like particles. J. Mol. Biol. 2018;430:2453-2467.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jmb.2017.10.010

15. 15.

    Felli, I. C. & Pierattelli, R. Intrinsically Disordered Proteins Studied by NMR Spectroscopy (Springer, 2015).

    Not in our library

16. 16.

    Williams RJ. The conformational mobility of proteins and its functional significance. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 1978;6:1123-1126.

    Not in our library10.1042/bst0061123

17. 17.

    Liu Y, Wang X, Liu B. A comprehensive review and comparison of existing computational methods for intrinsically disordered protein and region prediction. Brief. Bioinform. 2019;20:330-346.

    Not in our library10.1093/bib/bbx126

18. 18.
    Length-dependent prediction of protein intrinsic disorder · 2006

    No notice
19. 19.

    Linding R, et al. Protein disorder prediction: implications for structural proteomics. Structure. 2003;11:1453-1459.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.str.2003.10.002

20. 20.
    DISOPRED3: precise disordered region predictions with annotated protein-binding activity · 2014

    No notice
21. 21.

    Mészáros, B., Erdős, G. & Dosztányi, Z. IUPred2A: context-dependent prediction of protein disorder as a function of redox state and protein binding. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, W329–W337 (2018).

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/gky384

22. 22.

    Walsh I, Martin AJM, Di Domenico T, Tosatto SCE. ESpritz: accurate and fast prediction of protein disorder. Bioinformatics. 2012;28:503-509.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btr682

23. 23.
    DisProt: intrinsic protein disorder annotation in 2020 · 2019

    No notice
24. 24.

    Piovesan D, et al. MobiDB 3.0: more annotations for intrinsic disorder, conformational diversity and interactions in proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018;46:D471-D476.

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/gkx1071

25. 25.

    Fukuchi S, et al. IDEAL in 2014 illustrates interaction networks composed of intrinsically disordered proteins and their binding partners. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:D320-D325.

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/gkt1010

26. 26.

    Schad E, et al. DIBS: a repository of disordered binding sites mediating interactions with ordered proteins. Bioinformatics. 2018;34:535-537.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btx640

27. 27.

    Fichó E, Reményi I, Simon I, Mészáros B. MFIB: a repository of protein complexes with mutual folding induced by binding. Bioinformatics. 2017;33:3682-3684.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btx486

28. 28.
    InterPro in 2019: improving coverage, classification and access to protein sequence annotations · 2018

    No notice
29. 29.
    UniProt: the universal protein knowledgebase · 2016

    No notice
30. 30.
    PDBe: improved accessibility of macromolecular structure data from PDB and EMDB · 2015

    No notice
31. 31.

    Monastyrskyy B, Kryshtafovych A, Moult J, Tramontano A, Fidelis K. Assessment of protein disorder region predictions in CASP10. Proteins. 2014;82:127-137.

    Not in our library10.1002/prot.24391

32. 32.

    Radivojac P, et al. A large-scale evaluation of computational protein function prediction. Nat. Methods. 2013;10:221-227.

    Not in our library10.1038/nmeth.2340

33. 33.
    Intrinsically disordered proteins and structured proteins with intrinsically disordered regions have different functional roles in the cell · 2019

    No notice
34. 34.
    ELM—the eukaryotic linear motif resource in 2020 · 2019

    No notice
35. 35.
    High-throughput prediction of RNA, DNA and protein binding regions mediated by intrinsic disorder · 2015

    No notice
36. 36.
    MoRFchibi SYSTEM: software tools for the identification of MoRFs in protein sequences · 2016

    No notice
37. 37.

    Sharma, R., Raicar, G., Tsunoda, T., Patil, A. & Sharma, A. OPAL: prediction of MoRF regions in intrinsically disordered protein sequences. Bioinformatics34, 1850–1858 (2018).

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/bty032

38. 38.

    Forman-Kay JD, Mittag T. From sequence and forces to structure, function, and evolution of intrinsically disordered proteins. Structure. 2013;21:1492-1499.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.str.2013.08.001

39. 39.

    Sormanni P, et al. Simultaneous quantification of protein order and disorder. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2017;13:339-342.

    Not in our library10.1038/nchembio.2331

40. 40.

    Dyson HJ, Wright PE. Coupling of folding and binding for unstructured proteins. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2002;12:54-60.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0959-440x(02)00289-0

41. 41.

    Jakob, U., Kriwacki, R. & Uversky, V. N. Conditionally and transiently disordered proteins: awakening cryptic disorder to regulate protein function. Chem. Rev. 114, 6779–6805 (2014).

    Not in our library10.1021/cr400459c

42. 42.

    Bahar I, Chennubhotla C, Tobi D. Intrinsic dynamics of enzymes in the unbound state and relation to allosteric regulation. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2007;17:633-640.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.sbi.2007.09.011

43. 43.

    Van Roey K, et al. Short linear motifs: ubiquitous and functionally diverse protein interaction modules directing cell regulation. Chem. Rev. 2014;114:6733-6778.

    Not in our library10.1021/cr400585q

44. 44.

    Blikstad C, Ivarsson Y. High-throughput methods for identification of protein–protein interactions involving short linear motifs. Cell Commun. Signal. 2015;13:38.

    Not in our library10.1186/s12964-015-0116-8

45. 45.

    Vidalain P-O, Boxem M, Ge H, Li S, Vidal M. Increasing specificity in high-throughput yeast two-hybrid experiments. Methods. 2004;32:363-370.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ymeth.2003.10.001

46. 46.

    Scott JD, Pawson T. Cell signaling in space and time: where proteins come together and when they’re apart. Science. 2009;326:1220-1224.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.1175668

47. 47.

    Mehta, D. Highlight negative results to improve science. Nature10.1038/d41586-019-02960-3 (2019).

    Not in our library10.1038/d41586-019-02960-3

48. 48.

    Zhou J, Oldfield CJ, Yan W, Shen B, Dunker AK. Identification of intrinsic disorder in complexes from the Protein Data Bank. ACS Omega. 2020;5:17883-17891.

    Not in our library10.1021/acsomega.9b03927

49. 49.

    Monzon AM, et al. Experimentally determined long intrinsically disordered protein regions are now abundant in the Protein Data Bank. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020;21:4496.

    Not in our library10.3390/ijms21124496

50. 50.

    Altschul SF, et al. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997;25:3389-3402.

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/25.17.3389

51. 51.

    Capra JA, Singh M. Predicting functionally important residues from sequence conservation. Bioinformatics. 2007;23:1875-1882.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btm270

52. 52.

    Piovesan, D. & Tosatto, S. C. E. Mobi 2.0: an improved method to define intrinsic disorder, mobility and linear binding regions in protein structures. Bioinformatics34, 122–123 (2018).

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btx592

53. 53.
    Gene3D: Extensive prediction of globular domains in proteins · 2017

    No notice

Cited by papers we hold 10

• DisProt in 2024: improving function annotation of intrinsically disordered proteins · 2023
  No notice
• Systematic identification of conditionally folded intrinsically disordered regions by AlphaFold2 · 2023
  No notice
• Intrinsic protein disorder and conditional folding in AlphaFoldDB · 2022
  No notice
• AlphaFold2: A Role for Disordered Protein/Region Prediction? · 2022
  No notice
• Intrinsically Disordered Proteins: An Overview · 2022
  No notice
• A structural biology community assessment of AlphaFold2 applications · 2022
  No notice
• MobiDB: 10 years of intrinsically disordered proteins · 2022
  No notice
• flDPnn: Accurate intrinsic disorder prediction with putative propensities of disorder functions · 2021
  No notice
• Highly accurate protein structure prediction for the human proteome · 2021
  No notice
• DisProt in 2022: improved quality and accessibility of protein intrinsic disorder annotation · 2021
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.