3 ms·
The article also fails to mention that the structure of many proteins doesn't correspond to their "natural folding" but is modified by other proteins (e.g. chap
by Rochus 6y ago
The article also fails to mention that the structure of many proteins doesn't correspond to their "natural folding" but is modified by other proteins (e.g. chaperones), or is determined by the complex to which the protein belongs, i.e. cannot be predicted with data based on isolated proteins. Furthermore most proteins were measured in crystallized (i.e. not their natural) form, so the resulting static structure is likely not representative (even less if parts of the protein are "moving" to perform their function). So it would be quite naive to assume that from now on you can just throw a sequence into the black box and the right structure comes out.
- stuartbman 6y agoThanks for mentioning this, it's always difficult determining which levels of information to include, and which to leave out. I agree this is worth mentioning and I've now added this in to the article.
- Rochus 6y agoI think one should not withhold from the Python generation the fact that molecular biology is much more complex than one might realize in just looking at a few data. It's fine that AI can make scientifically relevant contributions, but to call it the greatest of all discoveries and Nobel Prize candidate, as done in many posts, is rather pretentious.