ArticlePloS one2014
Building a hierarchical organization of protein complexes out of protein association data.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Graph-Theoretical Prediction and Analysis of Biologically Relevant Substructures in an Open and Closed Conformation of Respiratory Complex I.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Organizing experimentally determined protein associations as a hierarchy can be a good approach to elucidating the content of protein complexes and the modularity of subcomplexes. Several challenges exist. First, intrinsically sticky proteins, such as chaperones, are often falsely assigned to many functionally unrelated complexes. Second, the reported collections of proteins may not be true "complexes" in the sense that they bind together and perform a joint cellular function. Third, due to imperfect sensitivity of protein detection methods, both false positive and false negative assignments of a protein to complexes may occur. We mitigate the first issue by down-weighting sticky proteins by their occurrence frequencies. We approach the other two problems by merging nearly identical complexes and by constructing a directed acyclic graph (DAG) based on the relationship of partial inclusion. The constructed DAG, within which smaller complexes form parts of the larger, can reveal how different complexes are joined. By merging almost identical complexes one can deemphasize the influence of false positives, while allowing false negatives to be rescued by other nearly identical association data. We investigate several protein weighting schemes and compare their corresponding DAGs using yeast and human complexes. We find that the scheme incorporating weights based on information flow in the network of direct protein-protein interactions produces biologically most meaningful DAGs. In either yeast or human, isolated nodes form a large proportion of the final hierarchy. While most connected components encompass very few nodes, the largest one for each species contains a sizable portion of all nodes. By considering examples of subgraphs composed of nodes containing a specified protein, we illustrate that the graphs' topological features can correctly suggest the biological roles of protein complexes. The input data, final results and the source code are available at ftp://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/qmbpmn/ProteinComplexDAG/.
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.