Prediction of Protein Function Using Common-Neighbors in Protein-Protein Interaction Networks

The recent high-throughput bio-techniques have provided us large-scale protein-protein interaction data through systematic identification of physical and genetic interactions among all proteins in an organism. Several previous studies have shown that using protein-protein interaction networks to predict protein function is a big step toward full understanding of the mechanisms of cells. However, the protein-protein interaction data derived from high-throughput experiments are typically very noisy, which presents great challenges to the existing methods. In this paper, we propose a novel common-neighbor-based model and a Bayesian framework to predict protein function on the basis of the small-world property of the protein-protein interaction network. We tested our approach on five data sets from various sources. The experimental results have shown that our approach has a better performance than several representative methods in terms of both precision and recall. In addition, our method is particularly effective to handle the high false-positive and false-negative rates in protein-protein interaction data

[1]  Gary D Bader,et al.  Systematic Genetic Analysis with Ordered Arrays of Yeast Deletion Mutants , 2001, Science.

[2]  Gary D Bader,et al.  Global Mapping of the Yeast Genetic Interaction Network , 2004, Science.

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

[4]  D. Eisenberg,et al.  Assigning protein functions by comparative genome analysis: protein phylogenetic profiles. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[6]  Barry Schweitzer,et al.  Microarrays to characterize protein interactions on a whole‐proteome scale , 2003, Proteomics.

[7]  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.

[8]  E. Myers,et al.  Basic local alignment search tool. , 1990, Journal of molecular biology.

[9]  Ronald W. Davis,et al.  Quantitative Monitoring of Gene Expression Patterns with a Complementary DNA Microarray , 1995, Science.

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

[11]  U. Alon,et al.  Broad patterns of gene expression revealed by clustering analysis of tumor and normal colon tissues probed by oligonucleotide arrays. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[13]  D. Eisenberg,et al.  Detecting protein function and protein-protein interactions from genome sequences. , 1999, Science.

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

[15]  T. Ito,et al.  Toward a protein-protein interaction map of the budding yeast: A comprehensive system to examine two-hybrid interactions in all possible combinations between the yeast proteins. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  Simon Kasif,et al.  Genomic functional annotation using co-evolution profiles of gene clusters , 2002, Genome Biology.

[17]  J. Mesirov,et al.  Molecular classification of cancer: class discovery and class prediction by gene expression monitoring. , 1999, Science.

[18]  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.

[19]  W. Wong,et al.  Transitive functional annotation by shortest-path analysis of gene expression data , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  Stan Z. Li,et al.  Markov Random Field Modeling in Computer Vision , 1995, Computer Science Workbench.

[21]  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.

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

[23]  D. Lipman,et al.  Improved tools for biological sequence comparison. , 1988, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[24]  T. Takagi,et al.  Assessment of prediction accuracy of protein function from protein–protein interaction data , 2001, Yeast.

[25]  A. Wagner.  The yeast protein interaction network evolves rapidly and contains few redundant duplicate genes. , 2001, Molecular biology and evolution.

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

[27]  D. Lockhart,et al.  Expression monitoring by hybridization to high-density oligonucleotide arrays , 1996, Nature Biotechnology.

[28]  Martin Suter,et al.  Small World , 2002 .

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

[30]  Stanley Letovsky,et al.  Predicting protein function from protein/protein interaction data: a probabilistic approach , 2003, ISMB.

[31]  P. Brown,et al.  Exploring the metabolic and genetic control of gene expression on a genomic scale. , 1997, Science.

[32]  Shmuel Sattath,et al.  How reliable are experimental protein-protein interaction data? , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.