Ramon Xulvi-Brunet1, Hongzhe Li. 1. Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Microarray-based gene expression data have been generated widely to study different biological processes and systems. Gene co-expression networks are often used to extract information about groups of genes that are 'functionally' related or co-regulated. However, the structural properties of such co-expression networks have not been rigorously studied and fully compared with known biological networks. In this article, we aim at investigating the structural properties of co-expression networks inferred for the species Saccharomyces Cerevisiae and comparing them with the topological properties of the known, well-established transcriptional network, MIPS physical network and protein-protein interaction (PPI) network of yeast. RESULTS: These topological comparisons indicate that co-expression networks are not distinctly related with either the PPI or the MIPS physical interaction networks, showing important structural differences between them. When focusing on a more literal comparison, vertex by vertex and edge by edge, the conclusion is the same: the fact that two genes exhibit a high gene expression correlation degree does not seem to obviously correlate with the existence of a physical binding between the proteins produced by these genes or the existence of a MIPS physical interaction between the genes. The comparison of the yeast regulatory network with inferred yeast co-expression networks would suggest, however, that they could somehow be related. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the gene expression-based co-expression networks reflect more on the gene regulatory networks but less on the PPI or MIPS physical interaction networks. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
MOTIVATION: Microarray-based gene expression data have been generated widely to study different biological processes and systems. Gene co-expression networks are often used to extract information about groups of genes that are 'functionally' related or co-regulated. However, the structural properties of such co-expression networks have not been rigorously studied and fully compared with known biological networks. In this article, we aim at investigating the structural properties of co-expression networks inferred for the species Saccharomyces Cerevisiae and comparing them with the topological properties of the known, well-established transcriptional network, MIPS physical network and protein-protein interaction (PPI) network of yeast. RESULTS: These topological comparisons indicate that co-expression networks are not distinctly related with either the PPI or the MIPS physical interaction networks, showing important structural differences between them. When focusing on a more literal comparison, vertex by vertex and edge by edge, the conclusion is the same: the fact that two genes exhibit a high gene expression correlation degree does not seem to obviously correlate with the existence of a physical binding between the proteins produced by these genes or the existence of a MIPS physical interaction between the genes. The comparison of the yeast regulatory network with inferred yeast co-expression networks would suggest, however, that they could somehow be related. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the gene expression-based co-expression networks reflect more on the gene regulatory networks but less on the PPI or MIPS physical interaction networks. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
Authors: Christopher T Harbison; D Benjamin Gordon; Tong Ihn Lee; Nicola J Rinaldi; Kenzie D Macisaac; Timothy W Danford; Nancy M Hannett; Jean-Bosco Tagne; David B Reynolds; Jane Yoo; Ezra G Jennings; Julia Zeitlinger; Dmitry K Pokholok; Manolis Kellis; P Alex Rolfe; Ken T Takusagawa; Eric S Lander; David K Gifford; Ernest Fraenkel; Richard A Young Journal: Nature Date: 2004-09-02 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Lars J Jensen; Michael Kuhn; Manuel Stark; Samuel Chaffron; Chris Creevey; Jean Muller; Tobias Doerks; Philippe Julien; Alexander Roth; Milan Simonovic; Peer Bork; Christian von Mering Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2008-10-21 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Bobby-Joe Breitkreutz; Chris Stark; Teresa Reguly; Lorrie Boucher; Ashton Breitkreutz; Michael Livstone; Rose Oughtred; Daniel H Lackner; Jürg Bähler; Valerie Wood; Kara Dolinski; Mike Tyers Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2007-11-13 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Renat Shaykhiev; Fouad Otaki; Prince Bonsu; David T Dang; Matthew Teater; Yael Strulovici-Barel; Jacqueline Salit; Ben-Gary Harvey; Ronald G Crystal Journal: Cell Mol Life Sci Date: 2010-09-06 Impact factor: 9.261
Authors: Ignat Drozdov; Jan Bornschein; Thomas Wex; Najl V Valeyev; Sophia Tsoka; Peter Malfertheiner Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-04-23 Impact factor: 3.240