ArticlePLoS computational biology2008
Predicting co-complexed protein pairs from heterogeneous data.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- Defining the extent of gene function using ROC curvature.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation of a Bayesian mixture model for gene network inference.Genes & genomics · 2019Article
- Machine learning applications in genetics and genomics.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2015Review
- Tissue-aware data integration approach for the inference of pathway interactions in metazoan organisms.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2015Article
- Probabilistic inference of biological networks via data integration.BioMed research international · 2015Article
- Spotlite: web application and augmented algorithms for predicting co-complexed proteins from affinity purification--mass spectrometry data.Journal of proteome research · 2014Article
- Systems biology-based identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis persistence genes in mouse lungs.mBio · 2014Article
- Incorporating the type and direction information in predicting novel regulatory interactions between HIV-1 and human proteins using a biclustering approach.BMC bioinformatics · 2014Article
- Predicting protein complex in protein interaction network - a supervised learning based method.BMC systems biology · 2014Article
- Clustering based on multiple biological information: approach for predicting protein complexes.IET systems biology · 2013Article
- Evolutionary rate heterogeneity of core and attachment proteins in yeast protein complexes.Genome biology and evolution · 2013Article
- Review
- Article
- Supervised maximum-likelihood weighting of composite protein networks for complex prediction.BMC systems biology · 2012Article
- Comparative analysis and assessment of M. tuberculosis H37Rv protein-protein interaction datasets.BMC genomics · 2011Article
- Update of PROFEAT: a web server for computing structural and physicochemical features of proteins and peptides from amino acid sequence.Nucleic acids research · 2011Article
- Resolving the structure of interactomes with hierarchical agglomerative clustering.BMC bioinformatics · 2011Article
- Expanding the landscape of chromatin modification (CM)-related functional domains and genes in human.PloS one · 2010Article
- Simultaneous genome-wide inference of physical, genetic, regulatory, and functional pathway components.PLoS computational biology · 2010Article
- Protein complex forming ability is favored over the features of interacting partners in determining the evolutionary rates of proteins in the yeast protein-protein interaction networks.BMC systems biology · 2010Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Proteins do not carry out their functions alone. Instead, they often act by participating in macromolecular complexes and play different functional roles depending on the other members of the complex. It is therefore interesting to identify co-complex relationships. Although protein complexes can be identified in a high-throughput manner by experimental technologies such as affinity purification coupled with mass spectrometry (APMS), these large-scale datasets often suffer from high false positive and false negative rates. Here, we present a computational method that predicts co-complexed protein pair (CCPP) relationships using kernel methods from heterogeneous data sources. We show that a diffusion kernel based on random walks on the full network topology yields good performance in predicting CCPPs from protein interaction networks. In the setting of direct ranking, a diffusion kernel performs much better than the mutual clustering coefficient. In the setting of SVM classifiers, a diffusion kernel performs much better than a linear kernel. We also show that combination of complementary information improves the performance of our CCPP recognizer. A summation of three diffusion kernels based on two-hybrid, APMS, and genetic interaction networks and three sequence kernels achieves better performance than the sequence kernels or diffusion kernels alone. Inclusion of additional features achieves a still better ROC(50) of 0.937. Assuming a negative-to-positive ratio of 600ratio1, the final classifier achieves 89.3% coverage at an estimated false discovery rate of 10%. Finally, we applied our prediction method to two recently described APMS datasets. We find that our predicted positives are highly enriched with CCPPs that are identified by both datasets, suggesting that our method successfully identifies true CCPPs. An SVM classifier trained from heterogeneous data sources provides accurate predictions of CCPPs in yeast. This computational method thereby provides an inexpensive method for identifying protein complexes that extends and complements high-throughput experimental data.
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.