Are RNA networks scale-free?

A network is scale-free if its connectivity density function is proportional to a power-law distribution. It has been suggested that scale-free networks may provide an explanation for the robustness observed in certain physical and biological phenomena, since the presence of a few highly connected hub nodes and a large number of small-degree nodes may provide alternate paths between any two nodes on average—such robustness has been suggested in studies of metabolic networks, gene interaction networks and protein folding. A theoretical justification for why many networks appear to be scale-free has been provided by Barabási and Albert, who argue that expanding networks, in which new nodes are preferentially attached to highly connected nodes, tend to be scale-free. In this paper, we provide the first efficient algorithm to compute the connectivity density function for the ensemble of all homopolymer secondary structures of a user-specified length—a highly nontrivial result, since the exponential size of such networks precludes their enumeration. Since existent power-law fitting software, such as powerlaw , cannot be used to determine a power-law fit for our exponentially large RNA connectivity data, we also implement efficient code to compute the maximum likelihood estimate for the power-law scaling factor and associated Kolmogorov–Smirnov p value. Hypothesis tests strongly indicate that homopolymer RNA secondary structure networks are not scale-free; moreover, this appears to be the case for real (non-homopolymer) RNA networks.

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

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

[3]  Peter F. Stadler,et al.  tRNAdb 2009: compilation of tRNA sequences and tRNA genes , 2008, Nucleic Acids Res..

[4]  George Kingsley Zipf,et al.  Human behavior and the principle of least effort , 1949 .

[5]  P. Schuster,et al.  RNA folding at elementary step resolution. , 1999, RNA.

[6]  P. Clote.  On the scale-free nature of RNA secondary structure networks , 2018, 1807.00215.

[7]  W. Gilbert.  Why genes in pieces? , 1978, Nature.

[8]  S. Hanser,et al.  Using information theory to assess the diversity, complexity, and development of communicative repertoires. , 2002, Journal of comparative psychology.

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

[10]  Michael S. Waterman,et al.  On some new sequences generalizing the Catalan and Motzkin numbers , 1979, Discret. Math..

[11]  Peter Clote,et al.  Expected degree for RNA secondary structure networks , 2014, J. Comput. Chem..

[12]  B. Snel,et al.  The yeast coexpression network has a small‐world, scale‐free architecture and can be explained by a simple model , 2004, EMBO reports.

[13]  Michael Mitzenmacher,et al.  A Brief History of Generative Models for Power Law and Lognormal Distributions , 2004, Internet Math..

[14]  An-Ping Zeng,et al.  The Connectivity Structure, Giant Strong Component and Centrality of Metabolic Networks , 2003, Bioinform..

[15]  Dietmar Plenz,et al.  powerlaw: A Python Package for Analysis of Heavy-Tailed Distributions , 2013, PloS one.

[16]  George Iliopoulos,et al.  Simulating from a multinomial distribution with large number of categories , 2007, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[17]  Peter Clote,et al.  Network Properties of the Ensemble of RNA Structures , 2015, PloS one.

[18]  J. Skolnick,et al.  The PDB is a covering set of small protein structures. , 2003, Journal of molecular biology.

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

[20]  Aaron Clauset,et al.  Scale-free networks are rare , 2018, Nature Communications.

[21]  Romualdo Pastor-Satorras,et al.  Scale-free networks emerging from multifractal time series. , 2016, Physical review. E.

[22]  Alessandro Laio,et al.  Exploring the Universe of Protein Structures beyond the Protein Data Bank , 2010, PLoS Comput. Biol..

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

[24]  Gustavo S. França,et al.  The role of exon shuffling in shaping protein-protein interaction networks , 2010, BMC Genomics.

[25]  David Broido,et al.  Non-monotonic pressure dependence of the thermal conductivity of boron arsenide , 2019, Nature Communications.

[26]  Stefan Wuchty,et al.  Small worlds in RNA structures. , 2003, Nucleic acids research.

[27]  E I Shakhnovich,et al.  Computer simulations of prebiotic evolution. , 1997, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.

[28]  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.

[29]  Ryan Day,et al.  A consensus view of fold space: Combining SCOP, CATH, and the Dali Domain Dictionary , 2003, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[30]  Loren L Looger,et al.  Extant fold-switching proteins are widespread , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[31]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Fast algorithm for predicting the secondary structure of single-stranded RNA. , 1980, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[32]  Mark Newman,et al.  Networks: An Introduction , 2010 .

[33]  Raya Khanin,et al.  How Scale-Free Are Biological Networks , 2006, J. Comput. Biol..

[34]  Peter F. Stadler,et al.  ViennaRNA Package 2.0 , 2011, Algorithms for Molecular Biology.

[35]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  Power-Law Distributions in Empirical Data , 2007, SIAM Rev..

[36]  Vijay S Pande,et al.  Protein folded states are kinetic hubs , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

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