Assessing predictors for new post translational modification sites: A case study on hydroxylation.
Post-translational modification (PTM) sites have become popular for predictor development. However, with the exception of phosphorylation and a handful of other examples, PTMs suffer from a limited number of available training examples and sparsity in protein sequences. Here, proline hydroxylation i...
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2020-06-01
|
Series: | PLoS Computational Biology |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007967 |
id |
doaj-622e220bd713406783649d3739009b3a |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-622e220bd713406783649d3739009b3a2021-04-21T15:17:08ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS Computational Biology1553-734X1553-73582020-06-01166e100796710.1371/journal.pcbi.1007967Assessing predictors for new post translational modification sites: A case study on hydroxylation.Damiano PiovesanAndras HatosGiovanni MinerviniFederica QuagliaAlexander Miguel MonzonSilvio C E TosattoPost-translational modification (PTM) sites have become popular for predictor development. However, with the exception of phosphorylation and a handful of other examples, PTMs suffer from a limited number of available training examples and sparsity in protein sequences. Here, proline hydroxylation is taken as an example to compare different methods and evaluate their performance on new experimentally determined sites. As a guide for effective experimental design, predictors require both high specificity and sensitivity. However, the self-reported performance may often not be indicative of prediction quality and detection of new sites is not guaranteed. We have benchmarked seven published hydroxylation site predictors on two newly constructed independent datasets. The self-reported performance is found to widely overestimate the real accuracy measured on independent datasets. No predictor performs better than random on new examples, indicating the refined models do not sufficiently generalize to detect new sites. The number of false positives is high and precision low, in particular for non-collagen proteins whose motifs are not conserved. As hydroxylation site predictors do not generalize for new data, caution is advised when using PTM predictors in the absence of independent evaluations, in particular for highly specific sites involved in signalling.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007967 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Damiano Piovesan Andras Hatos Giovanni Minervini Federica Quaglia Alexander Miguel Monzon Silvio C E Tosatto |
spellingShingle |
Damiano Piovesan Andras Hatos Giovanni Minervini Federica Quaglia Alexander Miguel Monzon Silvio C E Tosatto Assessing predictors for new post translational modification sites: A case study on hydroxylation. PLoS Computational Biology |
author_facet |
Damiano Piovesan Andras Hatos Giovanni Minervini Federica Quaglia Alexander Miguel Monzon Silvio C E Tosatto |
author_sort |
Damiano Piovesan |
title |
Assessing predictors for new post translational modification sites: A case study on hydroxylation. |
title_short |
Assessing predictors for new post translational modification sites: A case study on hydroxylation. |
title_full |
Assessing predictors for new post translational modification sites: A case study on hydroxylation. |
title_fullStr |
Assessing predictors for new post translational modification sites: A case study on hydroxylation. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Assessing predictors for new post translational modification sites: A case study on hydroxylation. |
title_sort |
assessing predictors for new post translational modification sites: a case study on hydroxylation. |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
series |
PLoS Computational Biology |
issn |
1553-734X 1553-7358 |
publishDate |
2020-06-01 |
description |
Post-translational modification (PTM) sites have become popular for predictor development. However, with the exception of phosphorylation and a handful of other examples, PTMs suffer from a limited number of available training examples and sparsity in protein sequences. Here, proline hydroxylation is taken as an example to compare different methods and evaluate their performance on new experimentally determined sites. As a guide for effective experimental design, predictors require both high specificity and sensitivity. However, the self-reported performance may often not be indicative of prediction quality and detection of new sites is not guaranteed. We have benchmarked seven published hydroxylation site predictors on two newly constructed independent datasets. The self-reported performance is found to widely overestimate the real accuracy measured on independent datasets. No predictor performs better than random on new examples, indicating the refined models do not sufficiently generalize to detect new sites. The number of false positives is high and precision low, in particular for non-collagen proteins whose motifs are not conserved. As hydroxylation site predictors do not generalize for new data, caution is advised when using PTM predictors in the absence of independent evaluations, in particular for highly specific sites involved in signalling. |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007967 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT damianopiovesan assessingpredictorsfornewposttranslationalmodificationsitesacasestudyonhydroxylation AT andrashatos assessingpredictorsfornewposttranslationalmodificationsitesacasestudyonhydroxylation AT giovanniminervini assessingpredictorsfornewposttranslationalmodificationsitesacasestudyonhydroxylation AT federicaquaglia assessingpredictorsfornewposttranslationalmodificationsitesacasestudyonhydroxylation AT alexandermiguelmonzon assessingpredictorsfornewposttranslationalmodificationsitesacasestudyonhydroxylation AT silviocetosatto assessingpredictorsfornewposttranslationalmodificationsitesacasestudyonhydroxylation |
_version_ |
1714667519335202816 |