NLM DIR Seminar Schedule
UPCOMING SEMINARS
-
April 1, 2025 Roman Kogay
Horizontal transfer of bacterial operons into eukaryote genomes -
April 8, 2025 Jaya Srivastava
TBD -
April 15, 2025 Pascal Mutz
TBD -
April 18, 2025 Valentina Boeva, Department of Computer Science, ETH Zurich
Decoding tumor heterogeneity: computational methods for scRNA-seq and spatial omics -
April 22, 2025 Stanley Liang
TBD
RECENT SEMINARS
-
April 1, 2025 Roman Kogay
Horizontal transfer of bacterial operons into eukaryote genomes -
March 25, 2025 Yifan Yang
Adversarial Manipulation and Data Memorization in Large Language Models for Medicine -
March 11, 2025 Sofya Garushyants
Tmn – bacterial anti-phage defense system -
March 4, 2025 Sanasar Babajanyan
Evolution of antivirus defense in prokaryotes depending on the environmental virus load -
Feb. 25, 2025 Zhizheng Wang
GeneAgent: Self-verification Language Agent for Gene Set Analysis using Domain Databases
Scheduled Seminars on Dec. 17, 2024
In-person: Building 38A/B2N14 NCBI Library or Meeting Link
Contact NLMDIRSeminarScheduling@mail.nih.gov with questions about this seminar.
Abstract:
AlphaFold and other machine learning methodologies have vastly improved protein structure prediction. Despite their success, question remain how they can be best utilized to advance structure prediction for conformationally dynamic proteins, including those capable of fold switching. Approaches utilizing sequence clustering or masking have been shown to increase the prevalence of alternative conformation predictions, however, with these approaches there can be little correlation between prediction accuracy and confidence. We hypothesize that the basis of these alternative-conformation predictions is sequence associations with the alternative-conformation structures seen in the AlphaFold training set. If this is true, a smaller dataset should provide an ideal candidate for finding which sequence elements are driving predictions, so we turn to fold-switching proteins for testing. Indeed, we find that AlphaFold associates specific sequence features with alternative-conformation structures in its training set. We go on to demonstrate that these predictions have mixed success when compared to experimental results, and that a ground state prediction may be more reliable than an alternative state prediction.