Protein dynamics model predicting per-residue probability of microsecond-millisecond conformational exchange from sequence or structure.
Proteins are not static structures. Many function through motions on the microsecond-to-millisecond (µs-ms) timescale, in which parts of the chain interconvert between conformational states. This "conformational exchange" underlies enzyme catalysis, allostery, and ligand binding, but it is largely invisible to structure prediction tools that return a single folded model. Measuring µs-ms dynamics experimentally, typically with NMR relaxation-dispersion methods, is slow and demands specialist expertise, so dynamics data exists for only a small fraction of characterized proteins.
Dyna-1 addresses this gap by predicting, for each residue in a protein, the probability that it experiences µs-ms motion, taking sequence and/or structure as input. The model comes from the Wayment-Steele Lab at Scripps Research and was introduced in the 2025 preprint "Learning millisecond protein dynamics from what is missing in NMR spectra." Its central insight is that residues which go missing, that is, unassigned, in NMR spectra are frequently exchange-broadened by µs-ms motion. Rather than treating those absent peaks as a nuisance, the authors use them as a training signal, turning a large body of existing NMR data into supervision for a dynamics predictor.
Dyna-1 is a frozen-checkpoint predictor: pretrained weights are downloaded and applied zero-shot to arbitrary new proteins through a standalone inference script, with no per-protein retraining.
esm3-sm-open-v1 model, with an
alternate variant built on ESM-2 embeddings.Dyna-1 attaches a prediction head to features drawn from an intermediate
transformer layer of a pretrained protein language model, ESM-3
(esm3-sm-open-v1, layer 22), with an ESM-2-based alternate provided for users
who need it. Training uses two curated resources released alongside the model:
RelaxDB, a collection of 133 NMR relaxation datasets (R1, R2, and heteronuclear
NOE measurements) assembled from the BMRB and the literature, and RelaxDB-CPMG,
10 CPMG relaxation-dispersion datasets. Missing backbone amide assignments serve
as an additional dynamics label. Across more than 100 NMR datasets analyzed in
the study, the model's predictions correlate with experimentally measured
exchange, with the signal most pronounced at residues implicated in enzyme
catalysis and ligand binding. Weights and the RelaxDB datasets are hosted on
HuggingFace, and inference runs from the command line on a supplied PDB and chain.
Dyna-1 gives biochemists and structural biologists a fast, sequence-level screen for where a protein is likely to be dynamic, complementing static predictors such as AlphaFold that describe a single conformation. Predicted high-exchange residues can prioritize sites for mutagenesis, help interpret enzyme mechanism and allostery, flag candidate cryptic pockets or binding-coupled regions, and guide the design of NMR relaxation experiments toward the proteins and residues most likely to reveal functionally important motion.
By reframing the peaks that are absent from NMR spectra as a rich source of dynamics information, Dyna-1 makes a previously data-starved property, µs-ms conformational exchange, predictable at proteome scale from sequence. The finding that predicted dynamics concentrate at catalytic and binding residues, and appear evolutionarily conserved, reinforces the view that motion is an intrinsic part of protein function rather than incidental flexibility. As a preprint, the work awaits peer review; the model reports the probability of µs-ms exchange rather than full exchange kinetics or thermodynamics, and its primary weights inherit the non-commercial terms of the ESM-3 backbone.
Wayment-Steele, H. K., et al. (2026) Learning millisecond protein dynamics from what is missing in NMR spectra. bioRxiv.
DOI: 10.1101/2025.03.19.642801Papers that recently cited this model.
Samuel Sledzieski, Sonya M. Hanson
bioRxiv · Jul 2026
Hannah Fremlén, Björn M. Burmann
bioRxiv · May 2026
Luca Naef, Micheal Bronstein
Chemical Science · Apr 2026
The most-cited papers that cite this model.
Giacomo Janson, Michael Feig
Current Opinion in Structural Biology · Jul 2025
Bowen Jing, Bonnie Berger, T. Jaakkola
Current Opinion in Structural Biology · Sep 2025
Nicolas Wolf, Leif Seute, Vsevolod Viliuga, et al.
arXiv.org · Feb 2025
Samuel Sledzieski, Sonya M. Hanson
bioRxiv · Jul 2026
Mihir Bafna, Bowen Jing, Bonnie Berger
arXiv.org · Sep 2025
Share of papers citing this model.