ArticleBMC bioinformatics2006
Evaluation of clustering algorithms for protein-protein interaction networks.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 326 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
326 citing papers in PubMed.
- Platelet-derived S100A9 contributes to endotheliopathy in alcohol-associated hepatitis.JCI insight · 2026Article
- The Transcriptomic and Proteomic Molecular Signatures of Equine Multiple-System Neuropathy (Grass Sickness).Cells · 2026Article
- Vagus Nerve Stimulation Paired With Tones Alters the Auditory Cortex Proteome in a Rat Model of Rett Syndrome.Developmental neurobiology · 2026Article
- Review
- Degraded myelin is associated with cold hypersensitivity in paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Large-scale mouse mutagenesis identifies novel genes affecting vertebral anatomy.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2026Article
- Genomic adaptability and virulence of Bacillus anthracis: a machine learning-based pan-genome and comparative analysis.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- Benchmarking multiple gene ontology enrichment tools reveals high biological significance, ranking, and stringency heterogeneity among datasets.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- A graph clustering algorithm with hypergraph learning and a core-attachment strategy for protein complex identification.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- Article
- Proteome-Guided Drug Target Discovery for Periodontitis.Journal of clinical periodontology · 2026Article
- Familial colorectal cancer: search for novel predisposition genes.Human genomics · 2025Article
- MNetClass: a control-free microbial network clustering framework for identifying central subcommunities across ecological niches.mSystems · 2025Article
- Integrated network propagation identifies prognostic metabolic signatures in acute myeloid leukemia.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- BioID2-Based Tau Interactome Reveals Novel and Known Protein Interactions Associated with Multiple Cellular Pathways.Journal of proteome research · 2025Article
- Isomeric Differences in Nanoparticle's Surface Chemistry Alter Macrophage Interactions In Vitro Due to Protein Corona.ACS omega · 2025Article
- Whole Transcriptome RNA-Seq Reveals Drivers of Pathological Dysfunction in a Transgenic Model of Alzheimer's Disease.Molecular neurobiology · 2025Article
- Immediate postoperative effects of cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy using carboplatin on peritoneal tissue inflammatory and ischemic responses: an explorative porcine study.Pleura and peritoneum · 2025Article
- A multi-objective evolutionary algorithm for detecting protein complexes in PPI networks using gene ontology.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Impact of Uterus-Derived Prostaglandins on the Composition of Uterine Fluid During the Period of Conceptus Elongation in Dairy Heifers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
266 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProtein interactions are crucial components of all cellular processes. Recently, high-throughput methods have been developed to obtain a global description of the interactome (the whole network of protein interactions for a given organism). In 2002, the yeast interactome was estimated to contain up to 80,000 potential interactions. This estimate is based on the integration of data sets obtained by various methods (mass spectrometry, two-hybrid methods, genetic studies). High-throughput methods are known, however, to yield a non-negligible rate of false positives, and to miss a fraction of existing interactions. The interactome can be represented as a graph where nodes correspond with proteins and edges with pairwise interactions. In recent years clustering methods have been developed and applied in order to extract relevant modules from such graphs. These algorithms require the specification of parameters that may drastically affect the results. In this paper we present a comparative assessment of four algorithms: Markov Clustering (MCL), Restricted Neighborhood Search Clustering (RNSC), Super Paramagnetic Clustering (SPC), and Molecular Complex Detection (MCODE).
resultsA test graph was built on the basis of 220 complexes annotated in the MIPS database. To evaluate the robustness to false positives and false negatives, we derived 41 altered graphs by randomly removing edges from or adding edges to the test graph in various proportions. Each clustering algorithm was applied to these graphs with various parameter settings, and the clusters were compared with the annotated complexes. We analyzed the sensitivity of the algorithms to the parameters and determined their optimal parameter values. We also evaluated their robustness to alterations of the test graph. We then applied the four algorithms to six graphs obtained from high-throughput experiments and compared the resulting clusters with the annotated complexes.
conclusionThis analysis shows that MCL is remarkably robust to graph alterations. In the tests of robustness, RNSC is more sensitive to edge deletion but less sensitive to the use of suboptimal parameter values. The other two algorithms are clearly weaker under most conditions. The analysis of high-throughput data supports the superiority of MCL for the extraction of complexes from interaction networks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.