Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32349657›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2020

Intrinsic limitations in mainstream methods of identifying network motifs in biology.

James Fodor, Michael Brand, Rebecca J Stones, Ashley M Buckle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Compression-based inference of network motif sets.PLoS computational biology · 2024
    Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

James FodorDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, 3800, Australia.
Michael BrandOtzma Analytics Pty Ltd, Bentleigh East, Victoria, Australia.
Rebecca J StonesFaculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, 3800, Australia.
Ashley M BuckleDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, 3800, Australia. ashley.buckle@monash.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2943-9044

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council 1022688Young Scientists Fund 11450110409
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNetwork motifs are connectivity structures that occur with significantly higher frequency than chance, and are thought to play important roles in complex biological networks, for example in gene regulation, interactomes, and metabolomes. Network motifs may also become pivotal in the rational design and engineering of complex biological systems underpinning the field of synthetic biology. Distinguishing true motifs from arbitrary substructures, however, remains a challenge.

resultsHere we demonstrate both theoretically and empirically that implicit assumptions present in mainstream methods for motif identification do not necessarily hold, with the ramification that motif studies using these mainstream methods are less able to effectively differentiate between spurious results and events of true statistical significance than is often presented. We show that these difficulties cannot be overcome without revising the methods of statistical analysis used to identify motifs.

conclusionsPresent-day methods for the discovery of network motifs, and, indeed, even the methods for defining what they are, are critically reliant on a set of incorrect assumptions, casting a doubt on the scientific validity of motif-driven discoveries. The implications of these findings are therefore far-reaching across diverse areas of biology.

Indexed as

Gene Regulatory NetworksAlgorithmsComputational BiologyGene Expression RegulationHumansReproducibility of ResultsGene regulationNetwork motifsNetwork substructures

Identifiers

PMID32349657
PMCPMC7191746

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.