PRINCESS, a Protein Interaction Confidence Evaluation System with Multiple Data Sources*S

Advances in proteomics technologies have enabled novel protein interactions to be detected at high speed, but they come at the expense of relatively low quality. Therefore, a crucial step in utilizing the high throughput protein interaction data is evaluating their confidence and then separating the subsets of reliable interactions from the background noise for further analyses. Using Bayesian network approaches, we combine multiple heterogeneous biological evidences, including model organism protein-protein interaction, interaction domain, functional annotation, gene expression, genome context, and network topology structure, to assign reliability to the human protein-protein interactions identified by high throughput experiments. This method shows high sensitivity and specificity to predict true interactions from the human high throughput protein-protein interaction data sets. This method has been developed into an on-line confidence scoring system specifically for the human high throughput protein-protein interactions. Users may submit their protein-protein interaction data on line, and the detailed information about the supporting evidence for query interactions together with the confidence scores will be returned. The Web interface of PRINCESS (protein interaction confidence evaluation system with multiple data sources) is available at the website of China Human Proteome Organisation.

[1]  A. Fraser,et al.  A first-draft human protein-interaction map , 2004, Genome Biology.

[2]  Christian von Mering,et al.  STRING 7—recent developments in the integration and prediction of protein interactions , 2006, Nucleic Acids Res..

[3]  Adam J. Smith,et al.  The Database of Interacting Proteins: 2004 update , 2004, Nucleic Acids Res..

[4]  See-Kiong Ng,et al.  InterDom: a database of putative interacting protein domains for validating predicted protein interactions and complexes , 2003, Nucleic Acids Res..

[5]  R. Karp,et al.  Conserved pathways within bacteria and yeast as revealed by global protein network alignment , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[6]  J. Rothberg,et al.  Gaining confidence in high-throughput protein interaction networks , 2004, Nature Biotechnology.

[7]  M. Vidal,et al.  Identification of potential interaction networks using sequence-based searches for conserved protein-protein interactions or "interologs". , 2001, Genome research.

[8]  S. L. Wong,et al.  A Map of the Interactome Network of the Metazoan C. elegans , 2004, Science.

[9]  P. Bork,et al.  Functional organization of the yeast proteome by systematic analysis of protein complexes , 2002, Nature.

[10]  Haruki Nakamura,et al.  Filtering high-throughput protein-protein interaction data using a combination of genomic features , 2005, BMC Bioinformatics.

[11]  D. Bray.  Molecular Networks: The Top-Down View , 2003, Science.

[12]  Fuchu He,et al.  An Integrated Strategy for Functional Analysis in Large-scale Proteomic Research by Gene Ontology , 2005 .

[13]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  Data mining: practical machine learning tools and techniques, 3rd Edition , 1999 .

[14]  H. Lehrach,et al.  A Human Protein-Protein Interaction Network: A Resource for Annotating the Proteome , 2005, Cell.

[15]  Erik L. L. Sonnhammer,et al.  Inparanoid: a comprehensive database of eukaryotic orthologs , 2004, Nucleic Acids Res..

[16]  M. Vidal,et al.  Effect of sampling on topology predictions of protein-protein interaction networks , 2005, Nature Biotechnology.

[17]  Alfonso Valencia,et al.  Computational methods for the prediction of protein interaction partners , 2004 .

[18]  Lan V. Zhang,et al.  Evidence for dynamically organized modularity in the yeast protein–protein interaction network , 2004, Nature.

[19]  Dmitrij Frishman,et al.  Conservation of protein-protein interactions - lessons from ascomycota. , 2004, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[20]  S. L. Wong,et al.  Towards a proteome-scale map of the human protein–protein interaction network , 2005, Nature.

[21]  S. Shen-Orr,et al.  Networks Network Motifs : Simple Building Blocks of Complex , 2002 .

[22]  Charles Darwin,et al.  Experiments , 1800, The Medical and physical journal.

[23]  E. Birney,et al.  The International Protein Index: An integrated database for proteomics experiments , 2004, Proteomics.

[24]  R. Ozawa,et al.  A comprehensive two-hybrid analysis to explore the yeast protein interactome , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[25]  D. Goldberg,et al.  Assessing experimentally derived interactions in a small world , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[26]  Thomas Lengauer,et al.  Confirmation of human protein interaction data by human expression data , 2005, BMC Bioinformatics.

[27]  Ian Witten,et al.  Data Mining , 2000 .

[28]  T. Pawson,et al.  Assembly of Cell Regulatory Systems Through Protein Interaction Domains , 2003, Science.

[29]  S. Shen-Orr,et al.  Network motifs: simple building blocks of complex networks. , 2002, Science.

[30]  M. Ashburner,et al.  Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology , 2000, Nature Genetics.

[31]  Dipanwita Roy Chowdhury,et al.  Human protein reference database as a discovery resource for proteomics , 2004, Nucleic Acids Res..

[32]  M. Gerstein,et al.  A Bayesian Networks Approach for Predicting Protein-Protein Interactions from Genomic Data , 2003, Science.

[33]  Xiao-Hua Zhou,et al.  Statistical Methods in Diagnostic Medicine , 2002 .

[34]  Yoshihide Hayashizaki,et al.  Interaction generality, a measurement to assess the reliability of a protein-protein interaction. , 2002, Nucleic acids research.

[35]  Sue Povey,et al.  Genew: the Human Gene Nomenclature Database , 2002, Nucleic Acids Res..

[36]  J. Hopfield,et al.  From molecular to modular cell biology , 1999, Nature.

[37]  P. Kemmeren,et al.  Protein interaction verification and functional annotation by integrated analysis of genome-scale data. , 2002, Molecular cell.

[38]  B. Snel,et al.  Comparative assessment of large-scale data sets of protein–protein interactions , 2002, Nature.

[39]  James R. Knight,et al.  A Protein Interaction Map of Drosophila melanogaster , 2003, Science.

[40]  James R. Knight,et al.  A comprehensive analysis of protein–protein interactions in Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2000, Nature.

[41]  Gary D Bader,et al.  Systematic identification of protein complexes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by mass spectrometry , 2002, Nature.

[42]  Hongyu Zhao,et al.  Are scale-free networks robust to measurement errors? , 2005, BMC Bioinformatics.

[43]  Pierre Baldi,et al.  Assessing the accuracy of prediction algorithms for classification: an overview , 2000, Bioinform..

[44]  J. Welsh,et al.  Molecular classification of human carcinomas by use of gene expression signatures. , 2001, Cancer research.

[45]  William Stafford Noble,et al.  Classification of clear-cell sarcoma as a subtype of melanoma by genomic profiling. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[46]  Dong Dong,et al.  IntNetDB v1.0: an integrated protein-protein interaction network database generated by a probabilistic model , 2006, BMC Bioinformatics.

[47]  T. Barrette,et al.  Probabilistic model of the human protein-protein interaction network , 2005, Nature Biotechnology.

[48]  E. Marcotte,et al.  Computational genetics: finding protein function by nonhomology methods. , 2000, Current opinion in structural biology.

[49]  Robert B. Russell,et al.  3did: interacting protein domains of known three-dimensional structure , 2004, Nucleic Acids Res..

[50]  D. Botstein,et al.  Cluster analysis and display of genome-wide expression patterns. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.