| Literature DB >> 27642606 |
Nicola Bernabò1, Alessandra Ordinelli1, Marina Ramal Sanchez1, Mauro Mattioli2, Barbara Barboni1.
Abstract
Here we realized a networks-based model representing the process of actin remodelling that occurs during the acquisition of fertilizing ability of human spermatozoa (HumanMade_ActinSpermNetwork, HM_ASN). Then, we compared it with the networks provided by two different text mining tools: Agilent Literature Search (ALS) and PESCADOR. As a reference, we used the data from the online repository Kyoto Encyclopaedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG), referred to the actin dynamics in a more general biological context. We found that HM_ALS and the networks from KEGG data shared the same scale-free topology following the Barabasi-Albert model, thus suggesting that the information is spread within the network quickly and efficiently. On the contrary, the networks obtained by ALS and PESCADOR have a scale-free hierarchical architecture, which implies a different pattern of information transmission. Also, the hubs identified within the networks are different: HM_ALS and KEGG networks contain as hubs several molecules known to be involved in actin signalling; ALS was unable to find other hubs than "actin," whereas PESCADOR gave some nonspecific result. This seems to suggest that the human-made information retrieval in the case of a specific event, such as actin dynamics in human spermatozoa, could be a reliable strategy.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27642606 PMCID: PMC5013236 DOI: 10.1155/2016/9795409
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Main topological parameters assessed in this study.
| Parameter | Definition |
|---|---|
| Connected components | It is the number of networks in which any two vertices are connected to each other by links and which is connected to no additional vertices in the network. |
| Number of nodes | It is the total number of molecules involved. |
| Number of edges | It is the total number of interactions found. |
| Clustering coefficient | It is calculated as |
| Network diameter | It is the longest of all the calculated shortest paths in a network. |
| Shortest paths | The length of the shortest path between two nodes |
| Characteristic path length | It is the expected distance between two connected nodes. |
| Averaged number of neighbors | It is the mean number of connections of each node. |
| Node degree | It is the number of interactions of each node. |
| Node degree distribution | It represents the probability that a selected node has |
|
| Exponent of node degree equation. |
|
| Coefficient of determination of node degree versus number of nodes, on logarithmized data. |
Results of topological analyses of networks.
| Parameter | P_ASN | MC_P_ASN | ALS_ASN | MC_ALS_ASN | KEGG_AN | MC_KEGG_AN | HM_ASN | BA_RN | MC_BA_RN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Connected components | 10 | 1 | 7 | 1 | 23 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Number of nodes | 136 | 109 | 86 | 66 | 84 | 60 | 128 | 128 | 125 |
| Number of edges | 283 | 234 | 161 | 141 | 75 | 73 | 187 | 196 | 194 |
| Clustering coefficient | 0.577 | 0.552 | 0.637 | 0.656 | 0.017 | 0.024 | 0.073 | 0.024 | 0.025 |
| Network diameter | 9 | 9 | 5 | 5 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Shortest paths | 11624 (63%) | 8230 (69%) | 4344 (59%) | 4290 (100%) | 3546 (50%) | 3540 (100%) | 16256 (100%) | 13812 (95%) | 13806 (100%) |
| Characteristic path length | 3.799 | 3.876 | 2.332 | 2.346 | 4.294 | 4.299 | 4.064 | 4.440 | 4.441 |
| Avg. number of neighbors | 4.162 | 4.294 | 3.744 | 4.273 | 1.786 | 2.433 | 2.921 | 2.975 | 3.017 |
Results of node degree analysis of networks.
| P_ASN | MC_P_ASN | ALS_ASN | MC_ALS_ASN | KEGG_AN | MC_KEGG_AN | HM_ASN | BA_RN | MC_BA_RN | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| −1.348 | −0.941 | −0.881 | −0.741 | −1.596 | −1.540 | −1.459 | −1.317 | −1.299 |
|
| 0.741 | 0.825 | 0.862 | 0.790 | 0.530 | 0.494 | 0.979 | 0.895 | 0.860 |
|
| 0.736 | 0.546 | 0.671 | 0.617 | 0.799 | 0.778 | 0.860 | 0.805 | 0.780 |
Results of fitting on node degree versus clustering coefficient.
| P_ASN | MC_P_ASN | ALS_ASN | MC_ALS_ASN | KEGG_AN | MC_KEGG_AN | HM_ASN | BA_RN | MC_BA_RN | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| −0.763 | −0.479 | −0.915 | −0.921 | −0.178 | −0.198 | −0.490 | −0.640 | −0.663 |
|
| 0.737 | 0.662 | 0.704 | 0.708 | 0.121 | 0.128 | 0.647 | 0.414 | 0.438 |
|
| 0.477 | 0.342 | 0.810 | 0.815 | 0.030 | 0.038 | 0.505 | 0.482 | 0.391 |
Hubs of the networks.
| HM_ASN | MC_P_ASN | MC_ALS_ASN | KEGG_ASN |
|---|---|---|---|
| PKA | RHOA | ACTIN | RAC1 |
| Actin polymerization | MSP | ROCK1 | |
| Tyrosine phosphorylation | EGFR | PAK4 | |
| [Ca2+] | LIMK | RHOA | |
| cAMP | CDC42 | CDC42 | |
| ROS | GNA13 | ACTIN | |
| Actin depolymerisation | ROCK2 | ARHGEF7 | |
| F-actin | LIMK2 | MYL12B | |
| PLD | ACE | RRAS2 | |
| Rho GTPase | AKAP4 | ||
| H2O2 | AKAP3 | ||
| PIP2 cleavage | PRKAR2 | ||
| Arp2/3 complex | ROPN1 | ||
| ADF/cofilin | |||
| EGFR | |||
| HCO3 − | |||
| PKC |
Figure 1(a) In yellow are represented the search parameters that our database, HM_ASN, has in common with the ALS_ASN software, in blue with P_ASN software (two text mining tools), and in green with the KEGG database. (b) Venn diagram representation, which allowed the identification of the intersections between different databases other than HM_ASN. (c) In red are represented the elements used to create the database HM_ASN.
Figure 2Curves that represent the node degree distribution in HM_SAN, MC_P_ASN, MC_ALS_ASN, and MC_KEGG_AN.
Figure 3Venn's diagram showing the common hubs in HM_SAN, MC_P_ASN, MC_ALS_ASN, and MC_KEGG_AN.