1 / 19

Systematic Analysis of Interactome: A New Trend in Bioinformatics

KOCSEA Technical Symposium 2010. Systematic Analysis of Interactome: A New Trend in Bioinformatics. Young-Rae Cho, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Computer Science Baylor University. History of Bioinformatics. Stage 1. Sequence Analysis. Gene sequencing Sequence alignment

cruz-ware
Download Presentation

Systematic Analysis of Interactome: A New Trend in Bioinformatics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. KOCSEA Technical Symposium 2010 Systematic Analysis of Interactome:A New Trend in Bioinformatics Young-Rae Cho, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Computer Science Baylor University

  2. History of Bioinformatics Stage 1. Sequence Analysis • Gene sequencing • Sequence alignment • Homolog search • Motif finding

  3. History of Bioinformatics Computational Biology Stage 1. Sequence Analysis Stage 2. Structure Analysis • Gene sequencing • Sequence alignment • Homolog search • Motif finding • Protein folding • Homolog search • Binding site prediction • Function prediction

  4. History of Bioinformatics Computational Biology Functional Genomics Stage 1. Sequence Analysis Stage 2. Structure Analysis Stage 3. Expression Analysis • Gene sequencing • Sequence alignment • Homolog search • Motif finding • Protein folding • Homolog search • Binding site prediction • Function prediction • Function prediction • Gene clustering • Sample classification

  5. History of Bioinformatics Computational Biology Functional Genomics Systems Biology Stage 1. Sequence Analysis Stage 2. Structure Analysis Stage 3. Expression Analysis Stage 4. Network Analysis • Gene sequencing • Sequence alignment • Homolog search • Motif finding • Protein folding • Homolog search • Binding site prediction • Function prediction • Function prediction • Gene clustering • Sample classification • Network modeling • Interaction prediction • Function prediction • Pathway identification • Module detection

  6. Biological Networks • Definition • Maps of biochemical reactions, interactions, regulations between genes or proteins • Importance • Provide insights into the mechanisms of molecular function within a cell • Significant resource for functional characterization of genes or proteins • Require computational and systematic approaches • Examples • Metabolic networks • Protein-protein interaction networks • Genetic interaction networks • Gene regulatory networks (Signal transduction networks)

  7. Protein Interaction Networks • Determination • Experimental methods: Y2H, MS, Protein Microarray • Computational methods: Homolog search, Gene fusion analysis, Phylogenetic profiles • Genome-scale protein-protein interactions  Interactome • Representation • Un-weighted, undirected graph • Challenges • Unreliability • Large scale • Complex connectivity

  8. Network Re-structuring • Strategy • To resolve complex connectivity • Converts the complex graph to • a hierarchical tree structure • Uses the concepts of path strength, • functional linkage, and centrality • Process • Input: a protein interaction network • Output: a list of functional modules unweighted network edge weighting weighted network functional linkage measurement score matrix network restructuring structured network hub confidence measurement hubs network clustering clusters

  9. Path Strength • Path Strength Model • Assumption: each node in a path chooses a succeeding edge based on the weighted • probability • Path Strength Factors • Edge weights • Path length • Node weighted degree

  10. Functional Linkage shortest path length threshold • Measurements • Path strength of the strongest path between two nodes • Computational problem • Needs a heuristic approach • Uses a user-specified threshold of the max path length • Formula • k-length path strength: • Functional linkage:

  11. Network Restructuring • Centrality • Weighted closeness: • Algorithm • Computes centrality for each node a • Selects a set of ancestor nodes, T(a), of a by • Selects a parent node, p(a), of a by • Example

  12. Hub Confidence • Measurement • Selects a set of child nodes, D(a), of a by • Selects a set of descendent nodes, La, of a by • Computes the hub confidence, H(a), of a by • Example

  13. Clustering • Algorithm • Iteratively select a hub a with the highest hub confidence • Output the sub-tree La including a as a cluster (functional module) • Cluster Depth • The max path length from the root of the sub-tree to a leaf • Example

  14. Topological Assessment of Hubs • Network Vulnerability • Random attack: repeatedly disrupt a randomly selected node • Degree-based hub attack: repeatedly disrupt the highest degree node • Structural hub attack: repeatedly disrupt the node with the highest hub confidence • For each iteration, observes the largest component • Results

  15. Biological Assessment of Hubs • Protein Lethality • Determines lethal / viable proteins by knock-out experiment • Lethality represents functional essentiality • Orders proteins by degree and hub confidence • Observes the cumulative proportion of lethal proteins for every 10 proteins • Results

  16. Topological Assessment of Clusters • Modularity • A combined measure of density within each cluster and separability among clusters • Estimated by the ratio of the number of edges within a cluster (sub-graph) to the number of all edges starting from the nodes in the cluster (sub-graph) • Observes the average modularity of clusters with respect to the cluster depth • Results • More specific function module has higher modularity • Justify the general-to-specific concepts of hierarchical functional modules

  17. Biological Assessment of Clusters • f-Measure • Compares each output cluster X with the real functional annotation Y (from MIPS) • Recall = (# of common proteins of X and Y) / (# of proteins in Y) • Precision = (# of common proteins of X and Y) / (# of proteins in X) • f-measure = 2 × Recall × Precision / (Recall + Precision) • Results • Compared with the results from previous hierarchical clustering methods, e.g., edge-betweenness (top-down approach) and ProDistIn (bottom-up-approach)

  18. Conclusion • Motivation • Significant functional knowledge in protein interaction networks (interactome) • Complex connectivity • Contributions • Convert an unstructured network to a structured network • Conserve functional information through pathways • High network vulnerability, low functional lethality at hubs as a drug target • Applicable to various fields, e.g., social networks, WWW • Foundation of structural dynamics during network evolution

  19. Questions ? • Reference • Y.-R. Cho and A. Zhang, “Identification of functional modules by converting • interactome networks into hierarchical ordering of proteins”. BMC Bioinformatics, • 11(Suppl 3):S3, 2010

More Related