ArticlePloS one2015
Rechecking the Centrality-Lethality Rule in the Scope of Protein Subcellular Localization Interaction Networks.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Network Pharmacology Analysis of Liquid-CulturedMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Computational study of the motor neuron protein KIF5A to identify nsSNPs, bioactive compounds, and its key regulators.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Identification of Critical Genes and Pathways for Influenza A Virus Infections via Bioinformatics Analysis.Viruses · 2022Article
- Protein network analysis to prioritize key genes in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.IBRO neuroscience reports · 2022Article
- Inference of pan-cancer related genes by orthologs matching based on enhanced LSTM model.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Protein interaction potential landscapes for yeast replicative aging.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- A methodology and theoretical taxonomy for centrality measures: What are the best centrality indicators for student networks?PloS one · 2020Article
- A network analysis revealed the essential and common downstream proteins related to inguinal hernia.PloS one · 2020Article
- A random walk-based method to identify driver genes by integrating the subcellular localization and variation frequency into bipartite graph.BMC bioinformatics · 2019Article
- A Novel Method for Identifying Essential Genes by Fusing Dynamic Protein⁻Protein Interactive Networks.Genes · 2019Article
- Identification of essential proteins based on a new combination of topological and biological features in weighted protein-protein interaction networks.IET systems biology · 2018Article
- Evolution of In Silico Strategies for Protein-Protein Interaction Drug Discovery.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- A systematic survey of centrality measures for protein-protein interaction networks.BMC systems biology · 2018Article
- Exploring novel key regulators in breast cancer network.PloS one · 2018Article
- A new computational strategy for identifying essential proteins based on network topological properties and biological information.PloS one · 2017Article
- Predicting essential proteins based on subcellular localization, orthology and PPI networks.BMC bioinformatics · 2016Article
- Predicting diabetes mellitus genes via protein-protein interaction and protein subcellular localization information.BMC genomics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Essential proteins are indispensable for living organisms to maintain life activities and play important roles in the studies of pathology, synthetic biology, and drug design. Therefore, besides experiment methods, many computational methods are proposed to identify essential proteins. Based on the centrality-lethality rule, various centrality methods are employed to predict essential proteins in a Protein-protein Interaction Network (PIN). However, neglecting the temporal and spatial features of protein-protein interactions, the centrality scores calculated by centrality methods are not effective enough for measuring the essentiality of proteins in a PIN. Moreover, many methods, which overfit with the features of essential proteins for one species, may perform poor for other species. In this paper, we demonstrate that the centrality-lethality rule also exists in Protein Subcellular Localization Interaction Networks (PSLINs). To do this, a method based on Localization Specificity for Essential protein Detection (LSED), was proposed, which can be combined with any centrality method for calculating the improved centrality scores by taking into consideration PSLINs in which proteins play their roles. In this study, LSED was combined with eight centrality methods separately to calculate Localization-specific Centrality Scores (LCSs) for proteins based on the PSLINs of four species (Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Homo sapiens, Mus musculus and Drosophila melanogaster). Compared to the proteins with high centrality scores measured from the global PINs, more proteins with high LCSs measured from PSLINs are essential. It indicates that proteins with high LCSs measured from PSLINs are more likely to be essential and the performance of centrality methods can be improved by LSED. Furthermore, LSED provides a wide applicable prediction model to identify essential proteins for different species.
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.