TEMPI: probabilistic modeling time-evolving differential PPI networks with multiPle information

Motivation: Time-evolving differential protein–protein interaction (PPI) networks are essential to understand serial activation of differentially regulated (up- or downregulated) cellular processes (DRPs) and their interplays over time. Despite developments in the network inference, current methods are still limited in identifying temporal transition of structures of PPI networks, DRPs associated with the structural transition and the interplays among the DRPs over time. Results: Here, we present a probabilistic model for estimating Time-Evolving differential PPI networks with MultiPle Information (TEMPI). This model describes probabilistic relationships among network structures, time-course gene expression data and Gene Ontology biological processes (GOBPs). By maximizing the likelihood of the probabilistic model, TEMPI estimates jointly the time-evolving differential PPI networks (TDNs) describing temporal transition of PPI network structures together with serial activation of DRPs associated with transiting networks. This joint estimation enables us to interpret the TDNs in terms of temporal transition of the DRPs. To demonstrate the utility of TEMPI, we applied it to two time-course datasets. TEMPI identified the TDNs that correctly delineated temporal transition of DRPs and time-dependent associations between the DRPs. These TDNs provide hypotheses for mechanisms underlying serial activation of key DRPs and their temporal associations. Availability and implementation: Source code and sample data files are available at http://sbm.postech.ac.kr/tempi/sources.zip. Contact: seungjin@postech.ac.kr or dhwang@dgist.ac.kr Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

[1]  Joshua E. S. Socolar,et al.  Global control of cell-cycle transcription by coupled CDK and network oscillators , 2008, Nature.

[2]  Desmond J. Higham,et al.  Fitting a geometric graph to a protein-protein interaction network , 2008, Bioinform..

[3]  Matthew J. Beal.  Variational algorithms for approximate Bayesian inference , 2003 .

[4]  D. Lim,et al.  An HDAC inhibitor, trichostatin A, induces a delay at G2/M transition, slippage of spindle checkpoint, and cell death in a transcription-dependent manner. , 2009, Biochemical and biophysical research communications.

[5]  Seungjin Choi,et al.  Principal network analysis: identification of subnetworks representing major dynamics using gene expression data , 2011, Bioinform..

[6]  M. Omair Ahmad,et al.  Identification of Differentially Expressed Genes for Time-Course Microarray Data Based on Modified RM ANOVA , 2012, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics.

[7]  David Page,et al.  Modelling regulatory pathways in E. coli from time series expression profiles , 2002, ISMB.

[8]  A. Barabasi,et al.  High-Quality Binary Protein Interaction Map of the Yeast Interactome Network , 2008, Science.

[9]  Michal Linial,et al.  Using Bayesian Networks to Analyze Expression Data , 2000, J. Comput. Biol..

[10]  Teresa M Przytycka,et al.  Network integration meets network dynamics , 2010, BMC Biology.

[11]  Nicola J. Rinaldi,et al.  Serial Regulation of Transcriptional Regulators in the Yeast Cell Cycle , 2001, Cell.

[12]  Joel S. Bader,et al.  NeMo: Network Module identification in Cytoscape , 2010, BMC Bioinformatics.

[13]  A. G. de la Fuente.  From 'differential expression' to 'differential networking' - identification of dysfunctional regulatory networks in diseases. , 2010, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[14]  R. Sharan,et al.  Network-based prediction of protein function , 2007, Molecular systems biology.

[15]  Aleksandar Stevanovic,et al.  Geometric Evolutionary Dynamics of Protein Interaction Networks , 2010, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.

[16]  Sean R. Collins,et al.  Toward a Comprehensive Atlas of the Physical Interactome of Saccharomyces cerevisiae*S , 2007, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.

[17]  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.

[18]  Mike Tyers,et al.  BioGRID: a general repository for interaction datasets , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[19]  B. Snel,et al.  Comparative assessment of large-scale data sets of protein–protein interactions , 2002, Nature.

[20]  Trey Ideker,et al.  Integrating physical and genetic maps: from genomes to interaction networks , 2007, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[21]  Yongjin Park,et al.  How networks change with time , 2012, Bioinform..

[22]  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.

[23]  T. Weinert,et al.  RAD53, DUN1 and PDS1 define two parallel G2/M checkpoint pathways in budding yeast , 1999, The EMBO journal.

[24]  Riet De Smet,et al.  Advantages and limitations of current network inference methods , 2010, Nature Reviews Microbiology.

[25]  Le Song,et al.  KELLER: estimating time-varying interactions between genes , 2009, Bioinform..

[26]  W. K. Hastings,et al.  Monte Carlo Sampling Methods Using Markov Chains and Their Applications , 1970 .

[27]  Zhu-Hong You,et al.  Using manifold embedding for assessing and predicting protein interactions from high-throughput experimental data , 2010, Bioinform..

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

[29]  Inyoul Y. Lee,et al.  A systems approach to prion disease , 2009, Molecular systems biology.

[30]  A. Grigoriev.  A relationship between gene expression and protein interactions on the proteome scale: analysis of the bacteriophage T7 and the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. , 2001, Nucleic acids research.

[31]  Seungjin Choi,et al.  Inference of dynamic networks using time-course data , 2014, Briefings Bioinform..