ArticlePLoS computational biology2009
A novel scoring approach for protein co-purification data reveals high interaction specificity.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- A protein-protein interaction map reveals that the Coxiella burnetii effector CirB inhibits host proteasome activity.PLoS pathogens · 2022Article
- Article
- Inferring Protein-Protein Interaction Networks From Mass Spectrometry-Based Proteomic Approaches: A Mini-Review.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2019Review
- A two-step framework for inferring direct protein-protein interaction network from AP-MS data.BMC systems biology · 2017Article
- PIPINO: A Software Package to Facilitate the Identification of Protein-Protein Interactions from Affinity Purification Mass Spectrometry Data.BioMed research international · 2016Article
- Fundamentals of protein interaction network mapping.Molecular systems biology · 2015Review
- Experimental and computational analysis of a large protein network that controls fat storage reveals the design principles of a signaling network.PLoS computational biology · 2015Article
- Scoring Large-Scale Affinity Purification Mass Spectrometry Datasets with MiST.Current protocols in bioinformatics · 2015Article
- Affinity purification-mass spectrometry and network analysis to understand protein-protein interactions.Nature protocols · 2014Article
- A comparative analysis of computational approaches and algorithms for protein subcomplex identification.Scientific reports · 2014Article
- A sampling framework for incorporating quantitative mass spectrometry data in protein interaction analysis.BMC bioinformatics · 2013Article
- Systems biology approaches for discovering biomarkers for traumatic brain injury.Journal of neurotrauma · 2013Review
- Reconstituting protein interaction networks using parameter-dependent domain-domain interactions.BMC bioinformatics · 2013Article
- Computational framework for analysis of prey-prey associations in interaction proteomics identifies novel human protein-protein interactions and networks.Journal of proteome research · 2012Article
- Inferring high-confidence human protein-protein interactions.BMC bioinformatics · 2012Article
- Categorizing biases in high-confidence high-throughput protein-protein interaction data sets.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2011Article
- Inferring physical protein contacts from large-scale purification data of protein complexes.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2011Article
- Protein networks reveal detection bias and species consistency when analysed by information-theoretic methods.PloS one · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Large-scale protein interaction networks (PINs) have typically been discerned using affinity purification followed by mass spectrometry (AP/MS) and yeast two-hybrid (Y2H) techniques. It is generally recognized that Y2H screens detect direct binary interactions while the AP/MS method captures co-complex associations; however, the latter technique is known to yield prevalent false positives arising from a number of effects, including abundance. We describe a novel approach to compute the propensity for two proteins to co-purify in an AP/MS data set, thereby allowing us to assess the detected level of interaction specificity by analyzing the corresponding distribution of interaction scores. We find that two recent AP/MS data sets of yeast contain enrichments of specific, or high-scoring, associations as compared to commensurate random profiles, and that curated, direct physical interactions in two prominent data bases have consistently high scores. Our scored interaction data sets are generally more comprehensive than those of previous studies when compared against four diverse, high-quality reference sets. Furthermore, we find that our scored data sets are more enriched with curated, direct physical associations than Y2H sets. A high-confidence protein interaction network (PIN) derived from the AP/MS data is revealed to be highly modular, and we show that this topology is not the result of misrepresenting indirect associations as direct interactions. In fact, we propose that the modularity in Y2H data sets may be underrepresented, as they contain indirect associations that are significantly enriched with false negatives. The AP/MS PIN is also found to contain significant assortative mixing; however, in line with a previous study we confirm that Y2H interaction data show weak disassortativeness, thus revealing more clearly the distinctive natures of the interaction detection methods. We expect that our scored yeast data sets are ideal for further biological discovery and that our scoring system will prove useful for other AP/MS data sets.
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.