Confirmation of Organized Modularity in the Yeast Interactome

A recent PLoS Biology article [1] rejected the conclusions of two previous publications [2,3] that two categories of highly connected “hub” proteins—“date” and “party” hubs—have distinct properties in the Saccharomyces cerevisiae interactome network. Currently available protein–protein interaction datasets are vastly incomplete, even for yeast [4]. Therefore, it is reasonable to rigorously re-scrutinize global properties of interactome networks as new datasets become available. Here we show that distinctions between date and party hubs [2], previously shown in a high-quality filtered yeast interactome (FYI) dataset [2,3], are in fact confirmed in an updated literature-curated yeast interactome network.

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

[2]  K. Kwast,et al.  Metabolic-State-Dependent Remodeling of the Transcriptome in Response to Anoxia and Subsequent Reoxygenation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2006, Eukaryotic Cell.

[3]  George G. Roberts,et al.  Transcriptome profiling of Saccharomyces cerevisiae during a transition from fermentative to glycerol-based respiratory growth reveals extensive metabolic and structural remodeling , 2006, Molecular Genetics and Genomics.

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

[5]  T. Hughes,et al.  Signaling and circuitry of multiple MAPK pathways revealed by a matrix of global gene expression profiles. , 2000, Science.

[6]  Trey Ideker,et al.  Transcriptome profiling to identify genes involved in peroxisome assembly and function , 2002, The Journal of cell biology.

[7]  John J. Wyrick,et al.  Chromosomal landscape of nucleosome-dependent gene expression and silencing in yeast , 1999, Nature.

[8]  P. Brown,et al.  New components of a system for phosphate accumulation and polyphosphate metabolism in Saccharomyces cerevisiae revealed by genomic expression analysis. , 2000, Molecular biology of the cell.

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

[10]  D. Botstein,et al.  The transcriptional program of sporulation in budding yeast. , 1998, Science.

[11]  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.

[12]  P. Bork,et al.  Proteome survey reveals modularity of the yeast cell machinery , 2006, Nature.

[13]  D. Botstein,et al.  Arrest, adaptation, and recovery following a chromosome double-strand break in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. , 2000, Cold Spring Harbor symposia on quantitative biology.

[14]  P. M. Hartigan,et al.  Computation of the Dip Statistic to Test for Unimodality , 1985 .

[15]  C. Wilke,et al.  Why highly expressed proteins evolve slowly. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  T. Hughes,et al.  Exploration of Essential Gene Functions via Titratable Promoter Alleles , 2004, Cell.

[17]  Peter Walter,et al.  Functional and Genomic Analyses Reveal an Essential Coordination between the Unfolded Protein Response and ER-Associated Degradation , 2000, Cell.

[18]  S. Haggarty,et al.  Finding new components of the target of rapamycin (TOR) signaling network through chemical genetics and proteome chips. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  J. Derisi,et al.  Single-cell proteomic analysis of S. cerevisiae reveals the architecture of biological noise , 2006, Nature.

[20]  A. E. Hirsh,et al.  Adjusting for selection on synonymous sites in estimates of evolutionary distance. , 2005, Molecular biology and evolution.

[21]  T. Ideker,et al.  Integrating phenotypic and expression profiles to map arsenic-response networks , 2004, Genome Biology.

[22]  B. Pugh,et al.  Interplay of TBP inhibitors in global transcriptional control. , 2002, Molecular cell.

[23]  D. Botstein,et al.  Genomic expression responses to DNA-damaging agents and the regulatory role of the yeast ATR homolog Mec1p. , 2001, Molecular biology of the cell.

[24]  D. Botstein,et al.  Genome-wide Analysis of Gene Expression Regulated by the Calcineurin/Crz1p Signaling Pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae * , 2002, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[25]  Michael Ruogu Zhang,et al.  Comprehensive identification of cell cycle-regulated genes of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae by microarray hybridization. , 1998, Molecular biology of the cell.

[26]  Hunter B. Fraser,et al.  Modularity and evolutionary constraint on proteins , 2005, Nature Genetics.

[27]  Philip M. Kim,et al.  Relating Three-Dimensional Structures to Protein Networks Provides Evolutionary Insights , 2006, Science.

[28]  D. Pe’er,et al.  Module networks: identifying regulatory modules and their condition-specific regulators from gene expression data , 2003, Nature Genetics.

[29]  Nada Amin,et al.  Global architecture of genetic interactions on the protein network , 2003, Nature Biotechnology.

[30]  Bernhard Kuster,et al.  90S pre-ribosomes include the 35S pre-rRNA, the U3 snoRNP, and 40S subunit processing factors but predominantly lack 60S synthesis factors. , 2002, Molecular cell.

[31]  Sean R. Collins,et al.  Global landscape of protein complexes in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2006, Nature.

[32]  D. Botstein,et al.  Genomic expression programs in the response of yeast cells to environmental changes. , 2000, Molecular biology of the cell.

[33]  T. Hughes,et al.  High-definition macromolecular composition of yeast RNA-processing complexes. , 2004, Molecular cell.

[34]  T. Ideker,et al.  Comprehensive curation and analysis of global interaction networks in Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2006, Journal of biology.

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

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

[37]  J. Hartigan,et al.  The Dip Test of Unimodality , 1985 .

[38]  M. Tyers,et al.  Stratus Not Altocumulus: A New View of the Yeast Protein Interaction Network , 2006, PLoS biology.

[39]  Mike Tyers,et al.  Evolutionary and Physiological Importance of Hub Proteins , 2006, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[40]  A. E. Hirsh,et al.  Evolutionary Rate in the Protein Interaction Network , 2002, Science.

[41]  Dmitrij Frishman,et al.  MIPS: a database for genomes and protein sequences , 1999, Nucleic Acids Res..