Weighted Cohesiveness for Identification of Functional Modules and Their Interconnectivity

Systems biology offers a holistic perspective where individual proteins are viewed as elements in a network of protein-protein interactions (PPI), in which the proteins have contextual functions within functional modules. In order to facilitate the identification and analysis of such modules, we have previously proposed a Gene Ontology-weighted clustering coefficient for identification of modules in PPI networks and a method, named SWEMODE (Semantic WEights for MODule Elucidation), where this measure is used to identify network modules. Here, we introduce novel aspects of the method that are tested and evaluated. One of the aspects that we consider is to use the k-core graph instead of the original protein-protein interaction graph. Also, by taking the spatial aspect into account, by using the GO cellular component annotation when calculating weighted cohesiveness, we are able to improve the results compared to previous work where only two of the GO aspects (molecular function and biological process) were combined. We here evaluate the predicted modules by calculating their overlap with MIPS functional complexes. In addition, we identify the "most frequent" proteins, i.e. the proteins that most frequently participate in overlapping modules. We also investigate the role of these proteins in the interconnectivity between modules. We find that the majority of identified proteins are involved in the assembly and arrangement of cell structures, such as the cell wall and cell envelope.

[1]  Stefan Wuchty,et al.  Peeling the yeast protein network , 2005, Proteomics.

[2]  Björn Olsson,et al.  Weighted Clustering Coefficient for Identifying Modular Formations in Protein-Protein Interaction Networks , 2008 .

[3]  J. F. Poyatos,et al.  How biologically relevant are interaction-based modules in protein networks? , 2004, Genome Biology.

[4]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[5]  Kara Dolinski,et al.  Saccharomyces Genome Database (SGD) provides secondary gene annotation using the Gene Ontology (GO) , 2002, Nucleic Acids Res..

[6]  Carole A. Goble,et al.  Investigating Semantic Similarity Measures Across the Gene Ontology: The Relationship Between Sequence and Annotation , 2003, Bioinform..

[7]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Network biology: understanding the cell's functional organization , 2004, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[8]  Sarah A Teichmann,et al.  The origins and evolution of functional modules: lessons from protein complexes , 2006, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[9]  R. Parker,et al.  Functions of Lsm proteins in mRNA degradation and splicing. , 2000, Current opinion in cell biology.

[10]  Wim Van Criekinge,et al.  Yeast Two-Hybrid: State of the Art , 1999, Biological Procedures Online.

[11]  L. Lehle,et al.  The Oligosaccharyltransferase Complex from Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 1999, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[12]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Life's Complexity Pyramid , 2002, Science.

[13]  Edda Klipp,et al.  Systems Biology , 1994 .

[14]  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.

[15]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Functional and topological characterization of protein interaction networks , 2004, Proteomics.

[16]  Dekang Lin,et al.  An Information-Theoretic Definition of Similarity , 1998, ICML.

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

[18]  D. Thieffry,et al.  Modularity in development and evolution. , 2000, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[19]  J. Blake,et al.  Creating the Gene Ontology Resource : Design and Implementation The Gene Ontology Consortium 2 , 2001 .

[20]  Zelmina Lubovac,et al.  Combining functional and topological properties to identify core modules in protein interaction networks , 2006, Proteins.

[21]  Ioannis Xenarios,et al.  DIP: the Database of Interacting Proteins , 2000, Nucleic Acids Res..

[22]  Carole A. Goble,et al.  Semantic Similarity Measures as Tools for Exploring the Gene Ontology , 2002, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.

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

[24]  Gary D. Bader,et al.  An automated method for finding molecular complexes in large protein interaction networks , 2003, BMC Bioinformatics.

[25]  C. Deane,et al.  Protein Interactions , 2002, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.

[26]  L. Mirny,et al.  Protein complexes and functional modules in molecular networks , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  Feng Luo,et al.  Detecting Functional Modules from Protein Interaction Networks , 2006, First International Multi-Symposiums on Computer and Computational Sciences (IMSCCS'06).

[28]  A. Vespignani,et al.  The architecture of complex weighted networks. , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  Björn Olsson,et al.  Combining topological characteristics and domain knowledge reveals functional modules in protein interaction networks , 2005 .

[30]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Weighted evolving networks. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[31]  M. Mendenhall,et al.  Regulation of Cdc28 Cyclin-Dependent Protein Kinase Activity during the Cell Cycle of the Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 1998, Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews.

[32]  Igor Jurisica,et al.  Functional topology in a network of protein interactions , 2004, Bioinform..

[33]  Alexander Rives,et al.  Modular organization of cellular networks , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.