Non-standard proteins in the lens of AlphaFold 3: a case study of amyloids

Abstract While three-dimensional structures of globular and transmembrane forms are available for many amyloid proteins, structures of their amyloid forms are scarce in the PDB. Amyloids pose major challenges for both experimental structure determination and computational modelling. We evaluated the amyloid-modelling performance of the current top modelling software, AlphaFold 3 (AF3), using three datasets. Dataset 1 contains 153 proteins and peptides that are known to form fibrils, but their 3D structures have not been experimentally determined. Dataset 2 contains 56 non-aggregating/non-amyloid peptides. Dataset 3 contains seven proteins for which the three-dimensional fibrillar structure is known. Fibrillar structures were predicted for 34% of dataset 1, but unfortunately also for 54% of dataset 2. Fibrillar structures were successfully predicted for five out of seven proteins from dataset 3. Comparing AF3 with different methods, it outperformed Boltz, and predicted the structures of CsgA and α-synuclein more correctly than RibbonFold, whereas the latter predicted Aβ-42 better. The performance of AF3 in prediction of amyloid structures for our datasets seems hindered by low abundance of amyloid structures in the PDB and high prevalence of structure data for their non-fibrillar forms. AF3 tends to assign a higher quality score to globular oligomeric models than to fibrillar ones. A correct amyloid structure prediction is more likely to be obtained for shorter fragments. The amyloid modelling quality of AF3 seems underwhelming, but it can still provide hypotheses about amyloid structures in some cases. Our work also suggests the steps needed to achieve a better performance in the near future. Statement for a broader audience Amyloid proteins can form stable, insoluble fibrils that are often related to a neurodegenerative disease. Knowledge of the three-dimensional structure of these fibrils is important, e.g. for a drug design. We evaluate the performance of AlphaFold 3 on the prediction of amyloid structures and observe that it struggles with these cases. The problems seem to arise mainly from the nature of the AlphaFold 3 training dataset and polymorphic nature of many amyloids. Although the results are underwhelming, AlphaFold 3 can sometimes provide valuable insights into amyloid protein structures, something that only a few years ago still seemed a very hard to reach goal.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2026-09-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-68041-4
Citations
12
Primary Topic
Protein Structure and Dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.77

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Non-standard proteins in the lens of AlphaFold 3: a case study of amyloids

Jakub W. Wojciechowski, Alicja W. Wojciechowska
12 citations
Scientific Reports
Protein Structure and Dynamics
5.77
article

Non-standard proteins in the lens of AlphaFold 3: a case study of amyloids

Jakub W. Wojciechowski, Alicja W. Wojciechowska
article en
12 citations

Abstract

Abstract While three-dimensional structures of globular and transmembrane forms are available for many amyloid proteins, structures of their amyloid forms are scarce in the PDB. Amyloids pose major challenges for both experimental structure determination and computational modelling. We evaluated the amyloid-modelling performance of the current top modelling software, AlphaFold 3 (AF3), using three datasets. Dataset 1 contains 153 proteins and peptides that are known to form fibrils, but their 3D structures have not been experimentally determined. Dataset 2 contains 56 non-aggregating/non-amyloid peptides. Dataset 3 contains seven proteins for which the three-dimensional fibrillar structure is known. Fibrillar structures were predicted for 34% of dataset 1, but unfortunately also for 54% of dataset 2. Fibrillar structures were successfully predicted for five out of seven proteins from dataset 3. Comparing AF3 with different methods, it outperformed Boltz, and predicted the structures of CsgA and α-synuclein more correctly than RibbonFold, whereas the latter predicted Aβ-42 better. The performance of AF3 in prediction of amyloid structures for our datasets seems hindered by low abundance of amyloid structures in the PDB and high prevalence of structure data for their non-fibrillar forms. AF3 tends to assign a higher quality score to globular oligomeric models than to fibrillar ones. A correct amyloid structure prediction is more likely to be obtained for shorter fragments. The amyloid modelling quality of AF3 seems underwhelming, but it can still provide hypotheses about amyloid structures in some cases. Our work also suggests the steps needed to achieve a better performance in the near future. Statement for a broader audience Amyloid proteins can form stable, insoluble fibrils that are often related to a neurodegenerative disease. Knowledge of the three-dimensional structure of these fibrils is important, e.g. for a drug design. We evaluate the performance of AlphaFold 3 on the prediction of amyloid structures and observe that it struggles with these cases. The problems seem to arise mainly from the nature of the AlphaFold 3 training dataset and polymorphic nature of many amyloids. Although the results are underwhelming, AlphaFold 3 can sometimes provide valuable insights into amyloid protein structures, something that only a few years ago still seemed a very hard to reach goal.

Scientific Reports
Wrocław University of Science and Technology (PL), Stellenbosch University (ZA), Protein Research Foundation (JP), AGH University of Krakow (PL)
Narodowe Centrum Nauki, Narodowym Centrum Nauki, Infrastruktura PL-Grid, Academic Computer Centre Cyfronet, AGH University of Science and Technology
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Protein Structure and Dynamics
5.77
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.