» Articles » PMID: 23435231

CompaRNA: a Server for Continuous Benchmarking of Automated Methods for RNA Secondary Structure Prediction

Overview
Specialty Biochemistry
Date 2013 Feb 26
PMID 23435231
Citations 55
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

We present a continuous benchmarking approach for the assessment of RNA secondary structure prediction methods implemented in the CompaRNA web server. As of 3 October 2012, the performance of 28 single-sequence and 13 comparative methods has been evaluated on RNA sequences/structures released weekly by the Protein Data Bank. We also provide a static benchmark generated on RNA 2D structures derived from the RNAstrand database. Benchmarks on both data sets offer insight into the relative performance of RNA secondary structure prediction methods on RNAs of different size and with respect to different types of structure. According to our tests, on the average, the most accurate predictions obtained by a comparative approach are generated by CentroidAlifold, MXScarna, RNAalifold and TurboFold. On the average, the most accurate predictions obtained by single-sequence analyses are generated by CentroidFold, ContextFold and IPknot. The best comparative methods typically outperform the best single-sequence methods if an alignment of homologous RNA sequences is available. This article presents the results of our benchmarks as of 3 October 2012, whereas the rankings presented online are continuously updated. We will gladly include new prediction methods and new measures of accuracy in the new editions of CompaRNA benchmarks.

Citing Articles

DesiRNA: structure-based design of RNA sequences with a replica exchange Monte Carlo approach.

Wirecki T, Lach G, Badepally N, Moafinejad S, Jaryani F, Klaudel G Nucleic Acids Res. 2025; 53(2).

PMID: 39831304 PMC: 11744100. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkae1306.


Comparative RNA Genomics.

Backofen R, Gorodkin J, Hofacker I, Stadler P Methods Mol Biol. 2024; 2802:347-393.

PMID: 38819565 DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-3838-5_12.


A Hitchhiker's guide to RNA-RNA structure and interaction prediction tools.

Tieng F, Abdullah-Zawawi M, Md Shahri N, Mohamed-Hussein Z, Lee L, Mutalib N Brief Bioinform. 2023; 25(1).

PMID: 38040490 PMC: 10753535. DOI: 10.1093/bib/bbad421.


Machine learning for RNA 2D structure prediction benchmarked on experimental data.

Justyna M, Antczak M, Szachniuk M Brief Bioinform. 2023; 24(3).

PMID: 37096592 PMC: 10199776. DOI: 10.1093/bib/bbad153.


Persistent Homology for RNA Data Analysis.

Xia K, Liu X, Wee J Methods Mol Biol. 2023; 2627:211-229.

PMID: 36959450 DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-2974-1_12.


References
1.
Gardner D, Ren P, Ozer S, Gutell R . Statistical potentials for hairpin and internal loops improve the accuracy of the predicted RNA structure. J Mol Biol. 2011; 413(2):473-83. PMC: 3242814. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2011.08.033. View

2.
Zuker M, Stiegler P . Optimal computer folding of large RNA sequences using thermodynamics and auxiliary information. Nucleic Acids Res. 1981; 9(1):133-48. PMC: 326673. DOI: 10.1093/nar/9.1.133. View

3.
Zakov S, Goldberg Y, Elhadad M, Ziv-Ukelson M . Rich parameterization improves RNA structure prediction. J Comput Biol. 2011; 18(11):1525-42. DOI: 10.1089/cmb.2011.0184. View

4.
Sato K, Kato Y, Hamada M, Akutsu T, Asai K . IPknot: fast and accurate prediction of RNA secondary structures with pseudoknots using integer programming. Bioinformatics. 2011; 27(13):i85-93. PMC: 3117384. DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr215. View

5.
Bernhart S, Hofacker I, Will S, Gruber A, Stadler P . RNAalifold: improved consensus structure prediction for RNA alignments. BMC Bioinformatics. 2008; 9:474. PMC: 2621365. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-9-474. View