Graphical Analysis of Biocomplex Networks and Transport Phenomena

Many biocomplex networks such as the protein interaction networks and the metabolic networks exhibit an emerging pattern that the distribution of the number of connections of a protein or substrate follows a power law. As the network theory is developed recently, several quantities describing network structure such as modularity and degree-degree correlation have been introduced. Here we investigate and compare the struc­ tural properties of the yeast protein networks for different datasets with those quantities. More­ over, we introduce a new quantity, called the load, characterizing the amount of signal passing through a vertex. It is shown that the load distribution also follows a power law, and its charac­ teristics are related to the structure of the core part of the biocomplex networks.

[1]  Goldenfeld,et al.  Simple lessons from complexity , 1999, Science.

[2]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  The Structure and Function of Complex Networks , 2003, SIAM Rev..

[3]  D. Eisenberg,et al.  A combined algorithm for genome-wide prediction of protein function , 1999, Nature.

[4]  Ricard V. Solé,et al.  A Model of Large-Scale proteome Evolution , 2002, Adv. Complex Syst..

[5]  Reka Albert,et al.  Mean-field theory for scale-free random networks , 1999 .

[6]  Leonard M. Freeman,et al.  A set of measures of centrality based upon betweenness , 1977 .

[7]  Michalis Faloutsos,et al.  On power-law relationships of the Internet topology , 1999, SIGCOMM '99.

[8]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Hierarchical organization in complex networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[9]  K. Goh,et al.  Universal behavior of load distribution in scale-free networks. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[10]  Kwang-Il Goh,et al.  Packet transport and load distribution in scale-free network models , 2003 .

[11]  U. Brandes.  A faster algorithm for betweenness centrality , 2001 .

[12]  S. N. Dorogovtsev,et al.  Evolution of networks , 2001, cond-mat/0106144.

[13]  K. Sneppen,et al.  Specificity and Stability in Topology of Protein Networks , 2002, Science.

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

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

[16]  B. Bollobás.  The evolution of random graphs , 1984 .

[17]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Lethality and centrality in protein networks , 2001, Nature.

[18]  Gary D Bader,et al.  BIND--The Biomolecular Interaction Network Database. , 2001, Nucleic acids research.

[19]  Dmitrij Frishman,et al.  MIPS: analysis and annotation of proteins from whole genomes in 2005 , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[20]  Hawoong Jeong,et al.  Classification of scale-free networks , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  R. Albert,et al.  The large-scale organization of metabolic networks , 2000, Nature.

[22]  B. Kahng,et al.  Geometric fractal growth model for scale-free networks. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[23]  K-I Goh,et al.  Fluctuation-driven dynamics of the internet topology. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[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]  Albert,et al.  Emergence of scaling in random networks , 1999, Science.

[26]  M. Newman,et al.  Scientific collaboration networks. II. Shortest paths, weighted networks, and centrality. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[27]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  Internet: Growth dynamics of the World-Wide Web , 1999, Nature.

[28]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Hierarchical Organization of Modularity in Metabolic Networks , 2002, Science.

[29]  A. Wagner.  How the global structure of protein interaction networks evolves , 2002, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[30]  R Pastor-Satorras,et al.  Dynamical and correlation properties of the internet. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[31]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Statistical mechanics of complex networks , 2001, ArXiv.

[32]  Andrei Z. Broder,et al.  Graph structure in the Web , 2000, Comput. Networks.

[33]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Internet: Diameter of the World-Wide Web , 1999, Nature.

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

[35]  M. Newman.  Erratum: Scientific collaboration networks. II. Shortest paths, weighted networks, and centrality (Physical Review e (2001) 64 (016132)) , 2006 .

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

[37]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations , 2001, cond-mat/0104162.

[38]  B. Schwikowski,et al.  A network of protein–protein interactions in yeast , 2000, Nature Biotechnology.

[39]  M E J Newman.  Assortative mixing in networks. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[40]  S. Strogatz.  Exploring complex networks , 2001, Nature.

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

[42]  S. Redner.  How popular is your paper? An empirical study of the citation distribution , 1998, cond-mat/9804163.