Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Aditi Shenoy

dblp:242/0770 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0001-7748-2501ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
2 papers
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein function prediction › functional site prediction
metal-binding site prediction
0.812024
M-Ionic: prediction of metal-ion-binding sites from sequence using residue embeddings · Bioinform. 2024
Bioinformatics and computational biology
protein function prediction
0.812024
M-Ionic: prediction of metal-ion-binding sites from sequence using residue embeddings · Bioinform. 2024
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein structure prediction
model quality assessment
0.712023
Evaluation of AlphaFold-Multimer prediction on multi-chain protein complexes · Bioinform. 2023
Bioinformatics and computational biology
protein structure prediction
0.712023
Evaluation of AlphaFold-Multimer prediction on multi-chain protein complexes · Bioinform. 2023
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein structure analysis › quaternary structure
protein complex modeling
0.212023
Evaluation of AlphaFold-Multimer prediction on multi-chain protein complexes · Bioinform. 2023

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

residue embeddings · 0.8protein language model · 0.8dockq · 0.7alphafold-multimer · 0.7TM-score · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 M-Ionic: prediction of metal-ion-binding sites from sequence using residue embeddings
abstract
MOTIVATION: Understanding metal-protein interaction can provide structural and functional insights into cellular processes. As the number of protein sequences increases, developing fast yet precise computational approaches to predict and annotate metal-binding sites becomes imperative. Quick and resource-efficient pre-trained protein language model (pLM) embeddings have successfully predicted binding sites from protein sequences despite not using structural or evolutionary features (multiple sequence alignments). Using residue-level embeddings from the pLMs, we have developed a sequence-based method (M-Ionic) to identify metal-binding proteins and predict residues involved in metal binding. RESULTS: On independent validation of recent proteins, M-Ionic reports an area under the curve (AUROC) of 0.83 (recall = 84.6%) in distinguishing metal binding from non-binding proteins compared to AUROC of 0.74 (recall = 61.8%) of the next best method. In addition to comparable performance to the state-of-the-art method for identifying metal-binding residues (Ca2+, Mg2+, Mn2+, Zn2+), M-Ionic provides binding probabilities for six additional ions (i.e. Cu2+, Po43-, So42-, Fe2+, Fe3+, Co2+). We show that the pLM embedding of a single residue contains sufficient information about its neighbours to predict its binding properties. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: M-Ionic can be used on your protein of interest using a Google Colab Notebook (https://bit.ly/40FrRbK). The GitHub repository (https://github.com/TeamSundar/m-ionic) contains all code and data.
Aditi Shenoy, Yogesh Kalakoti, Durai Sundar, Arne Elofsson
Bioinform.1
2023 Evaluation of AlphaFold-Multimer prediction on multi-chain protein complexes
abstract
MOTIVATION: Despite near-experimental accuracy on single-chain predictions, there is still scope for improvement among multimeric predictions. Methods like AlphaFold-Multimer and FoldDock can accurately model dimers. However, how well these methods fare on larger complexes is still unclear. Further, evaluation methods of the quality of multimeric complexes are not well established. RESULTS: We analysed the performance of AlphaFold-Multimer on a homology-reduced dataset of homo- and heteromeric protein complexes. We highlight the differences between the pairwise and multi-interface evaluation of chains within a multimer. We describe why certain complexes perform well on one metric (e.g. TM-score) but poorly on another (e.g. DockQ). We propose a new score, Predicted DockQ version 2 (pDockQ2), to estimate the quality of each interface in a multimer. Finally, we modelled protein complexes (from CORUM) and identified two highly confident structures that do not have sequence homology to any existing structures. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: All scripts, models, and data used to perform the analysis in this study are freely available at https://gitlab.com/ElofssonLab/afm-benchmark.
Wensi Zhu, Aditi Shenoy, Petras Kundrotas, Arne Elofsson
Bioinform.2