2020
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.10555
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Macrel: antimicrobial peptide screening in genomes and metagenomes

Abstract: Motivation Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have the potential to tackle multidrug-resistant pathogens in both clinical and non-clinical contexts. The recent growth in the availability of genomes and metagenomes provides an opportunity for in silico prediction of novel AMP molecules. However, due to the small size of these peptides, standard gene prospection methods cannot be applied in this domain and alternative approaches are necessary. In particular, standard gene prediction methods have low precision for sho… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
40
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
1
40
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, the 95 potential virtual APPs (see SI8-1 and SI8-7 ) were evaluated by 24 in silico tools (see Table 9 ) to select the best drug-like peptides. We jointly analyze several antiparasitic activity predictions according to AMPDiscover , 37 AMPFun , 38 AMAP , 102 and AxPEP ( 103 ) web servers, toxic/hemolytic effects by all ML models in ToxinPred2 89 and by HemoPI , 90 HemoPred , 104 Happenn, 105 and Macrel , 106 respectively. Other relevant end points such as cell permeability and half-life were screened by ( CellPPD , 107 C2Pred 108 and MLCPP ( 109 )) and ( pLifePred 110 and HLP ( 111 )), respectively, while the most popular immune-toxicity end points (see Table 9 ), like allergenic reactions and aggregation/amylogenicity, were predicted by AlgPred2 , 112 MILAMP , 113 MetAmyl , 114 and others, see Table 9 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, the 95 potential virtual APPs (see SI8-1 and SI8-7 ) were evaluated by 24 in silico tools (see Table 9 ) to select the best drug-like peptides. We jointly analyze several antiparasitic activity predictions according to AMPDiscover , 37 AMPFun , 38 AMAP , 102 and AxPEP ( 103 ) web servers, toxic/hemolytic effects by all ML models in ToxinPred2 89 and by HemoPI , 90 HemoPred , 104 Happenn, 105 and Macrel , 106 respectively. Other relevant end points such as cell permeability and half-life were screened by ( CellPPD , 107 C2Pred 108 and MLCPP ( 109 )) and ( pLifePred 110 and HLP ( 111 )), respectively, while the most popular immune-toxicity end points (see Table 9 ), like allergenic reactions and aggregation/amylogenicity, were predicted by AlgPred2 , 112 MILAMP , 113 MetAmyl , 114 and others, see Table 9 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…AMPs were predicted from the genome contigs using the programme macrel (Meta[genomic] AMPs Classification and REtrievaL) (v0.4.0) [ 45 ], locally installed. The predicted AMPs sequences were converted to an amino acid FASTA file and uploaded to the efi-est programme [ 46 ], which generates an SSN that was uploaded to Cytoscape for the visualization of the relationships among the peptide sequences.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Taxonomic annotation of MAGs was performed with gtdbtk version 1.5.1 (Chaumeil et al 2020) and at the read level using Kaiju 1.8.2 (Menzel et al 2016). Identification of AMP sequences was performed using marcel v. 0.3.1 on default parameters (Santos-Júnior et al 2020). AMP sequences with haemolytic properties were verified and classified into functional types by using iAMP-2L platform (Xiao et al 2013).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%