Discover protein sequence signatures from protein-protein interaction data

BackgroundThe development of high-throughput technologies such as yeast two-hybrid systems and mass spectrometry technologies has made it possible to generate large protein-protein interaction (PPI) datasets. Mining these datasets for underlying biological knowledge has, however, remained a challenge.ResultsA total of 3108 sequence signatures were found, each of which was shared by a set of guest proteins interacting with one of 944 host proteins in Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome. Approximately 94% of these sequence signatures matched entries in InterPro member databases. We identified 84 distinct sequence signatures from the remaining 172 unknown signatures. The signature sharing information was then applied in predicting sub-cellular localization of yeast proteins and the novel signatures were used in identifying possible interacting sites.ConclusionWe reported a method of PPI data mining that facilitated the discovery of novel sequence signatures using a large PPI dataset from S. cerevisiae genome as input. The fact that 94% of discovered signatures were known validated the ability of the approach to identify large numbers of signatures from PPI data. The significance of these discovered signatures was demonstrated by their application in predicting sub-cellular localizations and identifying potential interaction binding sites of yeast proteins.

[1]  W. Kabsch,et al.  Dictionary of protein secondary structure: Pattern recognition of hydrogen‐bonded and geometrical features , 1983, Biopolymers.

[2]  Charles Elkan,et al.  Unsupervised learning of multiple motifs in biopolymers using expectation maximization , 1995, Mach. Learn..

[3]  Ronald W. Davis,et al.  A genome-wide transcriptional analysis of the mitotic cell cycle. , 1998, Molecular cell.

[4]  Michael Gribskov,et al.  Methods and Statistics for Combining Motif Match Scores , 1998, J. Comput. Biol..

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

[6]  W R Pearson,et al.  Flexible sequence similarity searching with the FASTA3 program package. , 2000, Methods in molecular biology.

[7]  Yudong D. He,et al.  Functional Discovery via a Compendium of Expression Profiles , 2000, Cell.

[8]  E. Sprinzak,et al.  Correlated sequence-signatures as markers of protein-protein interaction. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[9]  Ioannis Xenarios,et al.  DIP: The Database of Interacting Proteins: 2001 update , 2001, Nucleic Acids Res..

[10]  Gary D Bader,et al.  A Combined Experimental and Computational Strategy to Define Protein Interaction Networks for Peptide Recognition Modules , 2001, Science.

[11]  Jérôme Wojcik,et al.  Protein-protein interaction map inference using interacting domain profile pairs , 2001, ISMB.

[12]  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.

[13]  H. Herzel,et al.  Is there a bias in proteome research? , 2001, Genome research.

[14]  Rolf Apweiler,et al.  InterProScan - an integration platform for the signature-recognition methods in InterPro , 2001, Bioinform..

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

[16]  Gary D Bader,et al.  Analyzing yeast protein–protein interaction data obtained from different sources , 2002, Nature Biotechnology.

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

[18]  Minghua Deng,et al.  Inferring domain-domain interactions from protein-protein interactions , 2002, RECOMB '02.

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

[20]  E. O’Shea,et al.  Global analysis of protein localization in budding yeast , 2003, Nature.

[21]  C. Elkan,et al.  Unsupervised learning of multiple motifs in biopolymers using expectation maximization , 1995, Machine Learning.

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

[23]  Kuo-Chen Chou,et al.  Predicting 22 protein localizations in budding yeast. , 2004, Biochemical and biophysical research communications.

[24]  S. Teichmann,et al.  The evolution of domain arrangements in proteins and interaction networks , 2005, Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences CMLS.

[25]  Gajendra P. S. Raghava,et al.  ESLpred: SVM-based method for subcellular localization of eukaryotic proteins using dipeptide composition and PSI-BLAST , 2004, Nucleic Acids Res..

[26]  Dong-Soo Han,et al.  PreSPI: a domain combination based prediction system for protein-protein interaction. , 2004, Nucleic acids research.

[27]  Cathy H. Wu,et al.  InterPro, progress and status in 2005 , 2004, Nucleic Acids Res..

[28]  Guang R. Gao,et al.  Quasi-consensus-based comparison of profile hidden Markov models for protein sequences , 2005, Bioinform..

[29]  Jinyan Li,et al.  Discovery of stable and significant binding motif pairs from PDB complexes and protein interaction datasets , 2005, Bioinform..

[30]  Milana Frenkel-Morgenstern,et al.  Enhanced statistics for local alignment of multiple alignments improves prediction of protein function and structure , 2005, Bioinform..

[31]  Kuo-Chen Chou,et al.  Predicting protein localization in budding Yeast , 2005, Bioinform..

[32]  Dmitrij Frishman,et al.  The MIPS mammalian protein?Cprotein interaction database , 2005, Bioinform..