Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21861884›Full record

ArticleBMC systems biology2011

Biological interaction networks are conserved at the module level.

Guy E Zinman, Shan Zhong, Ziv Bar-Joseph

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC systems biology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. AIM: a comprehensive Arabidopsis interactome module database and related interologs in plants.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2014
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Optimization criteria and biological process enrichment in homologous multiprotein modules.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2013
    Article
  18. Computational solutions for omics data.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2013
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Guy E ZinmanLane Center for Computational Biology, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA.
Shan Zhong
Ziv Bar-Joseph

Funding

Reconstructing dynamic regulatory networksR01GM085022 · NIGMS · CARNEGIE-MELLON UNIVERSITY · PI BAR-JOSEPH, ZIV · 2008 to 2011
$1.1M
NIGMS NIH HHS 1R01 GM085022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOrthologous genes are highly conserved between closely related species and biological systems often utilize the same genes across different organisms. However, while sequence similarity often implies functional similarity, interaction data is not well conserved even for proteins with high sequence similarity. Several recent studies comparing high throughput data including expression, protein-protein, protein-DNA, and genetic interactions between close species show conservation at a much lower rate than expected.

resultsIn this work we collected comprehensive high-throughput interaction datasets for four model organisms (S. cerevisiae, S. pombe, C. elegans, and D. melanogaster) and carried out systematic analyses in order to explain the apparent lower conservation of interaction data when compared to the conservation of sequence data. We first showed that several previously proposed hypotheses only provide a limited explanation for such lower conservation rates. We combined all interaction evidences into an integrated network for each species and identified functional modules from these integrated networks. We then demonstrate that interactions that are part of functional modules are conserved at much higher rates than previous reports in the literature, while interactions that connect between distinct functional modules are conserved at lower rates.

conclusionsWe show that conservation is maintained between species, but mainly at the module level. Our results indicate that interactions within modules are much more likely to be conserved than interactions between proteins in different modules. This provides a network based explanation to the observed conservation rates that can also help explain why so many biological processes are well conserved despite the lower levels of conservation for the interactions of proteins participating in these processes.Accompanying website: http://www.sb.cs.cmu.edu/CrossSP.

Indexed as

AnimalsCaenorhabditis elegansConserved SequenceDrosophila melanogasterGene Regulatory NetworksMultiprotein ComplexesProtein Interaction MapsSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSchizosaccharomycesSpecies SpecificitySystems BiologyMultiprotein Complexes

Identifiers

PMID21861884
PMCPMC3212960

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.