Identifying conserved regions in protein sequences is a fundamental operation, occurring in numerous sequence-driven analysis pipelines. It is used as a way to decode domain-rich regions within proteins, to compute protein clusters, to annotate sequence function, and to compute evolutionary relationships among protein sequences. A number of approaches exist for identifying and characterizing protein families based on their domains, and because domains represent conserved portions of a protein sequence, the primary computation involved in protein family characterization is identification of such conserved regions. However, identifying conserved regions from large collections (millions) of protein sequences presents significant challenges.
In this paper we present a new, alignment-free method for detecting conserved regions in protein sequences called NADDA (No-Alignment Domain Detection Algorithm). Our method exploits the abundance of exact matching short subsequences (k-mers) to quickly detect conserved regions, and the power of machine learning is used to improve the prediction accuracy of detection. We present a parallel implementation of NADDA using the MapReduce framework and show that our method is highly scalable.
We have compared NADDA with Pfam and InterPro databases. For known domains annotated by Pfam, accuracy is 83%, sensitivity 96%, and specificity 44%. For sequences with new domains not present in the training set an average accuracy of 63% is achieved when compared to Pfam. A boost in results in comparison with InterPro demonstrates the ability of NADDA to capture conserved regions beyond those present in Pfam. We have also compared NADDA with ADDA and MKDOM2, assuming Pfam as ground-truth. On average NADDA shows comparable accuracy, more balanced sensitivity and specificity, and being alignment-free, is significantly faster. Excluding the one-time cost of training, runtimes on a single processor were 49s, 10,566s, and 456s for NADDA, ADDA, and MKDOM2, respectively, for a data set comprised of approximately 2500 sequences.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 August 2016.
All research outputs
#18,467,727
of 22,883,326 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#155,327
of 195,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#262,602
of 342,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,453
of 4,278 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,883,326 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 195,167 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,845 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,278 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
