4.7 Article

CRMSS: predicting circRNA-RBP binding sites based on multi-scale characterizing sequence and structure features

期刊

BRIEFINGS IN BIOINFORMATICS
卷 24, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/bib/bbac530

关键词

circular RNA; RNA-binding protein; Deep learning

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, we propose a method called CRMSS for discriminating circRNA-RBP binding sites based on multi-scale characterizing sequence and structure features. The CRMSS achieves superior performance over state-of-the-art methods in predicting circRNA-RBP binding.
Circular RNAs (circRNAs) are reverse -spliced and covalently closed RNAs. Their interactions with RNA -binding proteins (RBPs) have multiple effects on the progress of many diseases. Some computational methods are proposed to identify RBP binding sites on circRNAs but suffer from insufficient accuracy, robustness and explanation. In this study, we first take the characteristics of both RNA and RBP into consideration. We propose a method for discriminating circRNA-RBP binding sites based on multi -scale characterizing sequence and structure features, called CRMSS. For circRNAs, we use sequence k-mer embedding and the forming probabilities of local secondary structures as features. For RBPs, we combine sequence and structure frequencies of RNA -binding domain regions to generate features. We capture binding patterns with multi -scale residual blocks. With BiLSTM and attention mechanism, we obtain the contextual information of high-level representation for circRNA-RBP binding. To validate the effectiveness of CRMSS, we compare its predictive performance with other methods on 37 RBPs. Taking the properties of both circRNAs and RBPs into account, CRMSS achieves superior performance over state-of-the-art methods. In the case study, our model provides reliable predictions and correctly identifies experimentally verified circRNA-RBP pairs. The code of CRMSS is freely available at https://github.com/BioinformaticsCSU/CRMSS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据