ArticlePloS one2017
Comparative analysis of weighted gene co-expression networks in human and mouse.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Network Analysis of Microarray Data.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Sex-Specific Brain Transcriptional Signatures in Human MDD and Their Correlates in Mouse Models of Depression.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022Review
- Evolutionary conservation and divergence of the human brain transcriptome.Genome biology · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The application of complex network modeling to analyze large co-expression data sets has gained traction during the last decade. In particular, the use of the weighted gene co-expression network analysis framework has allowed an unbiased and systems-level investigation of genotype-phenotype relationships in a wide range of systems. Since mouse is an important model organism for biomedical research on human disease, it is of great interest to identify similarities and differences in the functional roles of human and mouse orthologous genes. Here, we develop a novel network comparison approach which we demonstrate by comparing two gene-expression data sets from a large number of human and mouse tissues. The method uses weighted topological overlap alongside the recently developed network-decomposition method of s-core analysis, which is suitable for making gene-centrality rankings for weighted networks. The aim is to identify globally central genes separately in the human and mouse networks. By comparing the ranked gene lists, we identify genes that display conserved or diverged centrality-characteristics across the networks. This framework only assumes a single threshold value that is chosen from a statistical analysis, and it may be applied to arbitrary network structures and edge-weight distributions, also outside the context of biology. When conducting the comparative network analysis, both within and across the two species, we find a clear pattern of enrichment of transcription factors, for the homeobox domain in particular, among the globally central genes. We also perform gene-ontology term enrichment analysis and look at disease-related genes for the separate networks as well as the network comparisons. We find that gene ontology terms related to regulation and development are generally enriched across the networks. In particular, the genes FOXE3, RHO, RUNX2, ALX3 and RARA, which are disease genes in either human or mouse, are on the top-10 list of globally central genes in the human and mouse networks.
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.