It is found that the size-adjusted characteristics of the different omics-based networks are very similar; the overall trend of how they change with time is also often the same, but the rate of the changes typically differs.
Abstract
Contextualized protein-protein interaction networks provide crucial insight into diseases and other biological processes, but for a profound understanding of such processes and their distinct effects on individuals, the protein-protein interactions within individual samples must be investigated. A straightforward approach to estimate the PPI network of a sample is to restrict a general network of known PPIs to the proteins that are found in the sample. Although proteomics methods are becoming more accessible and precise, large-scale and single-cell studies still mainly target characterizing the transcriptomics profile of the samples, which is then often used as an approximation of the protein activities. The correlation of gene expression and protein abundance has been addressed in the past, but information about the deviations of the different omics-based estimates of the PPI networks is still lacking. In this study, we performed a comparative analysis of transcriptomic-based and proteomic-based sample-specific PPI network estimates to fill this gap. We created a framework for a comprehensive and transparent comparison of the two omics levels in two independent datasets, with a special focus on time-related network dynamics. We found that the size-adjusted characteristics of the different omics-based networks are very similar; the overall trend of how they change with time is also often the same, but the rate of the changes typically differs. The characteristics of the nodes present in both types of networks also show high similarity and often different time-related rates of change, but this varies among metrics. These results shed light on the properties of PPI network estimations and advise caution in interpreting them appropriately.
Understanding the relationship between gene expression and protein abundance is central to molecular and systems biology. While gene expression reflects transcriptional activity, proteins are the functional molecules that determine cellular phenotypes. However, numerous post-transcriptional and translational regulatory...
Statistically modeling the interdependence between transcriptomics and protein abundances remains a persistent challenge in bioinformatics research. Transcriptomic data and proteomic abundances typically display a moderate Pearson's correlation of about 0.5, while in tumor conditions, the correlation may decrease to a...
Loulwah Arnaout, Volkhard Helms, Aram N. Papazian· Protein Science· 0 citations
The Port of Protein-Protein Interactomes (POPPIN), an integrated database dedicated to sharing experimentally verified PPIs and functional clues in rice, is constructed and serves as the first large-scale, experiment-based database for searchable PPIs in rice, and has the potential to be extended to other species under...
Comparisons of experimental techniques and computational prediction tools for RBP identification aim to facilitate more accurate mapping of RNA–protein interactomes, thereby advancing understanding of RBP functions and supporting the development of novel therapeutic interventions targeting RNA–protein complexes.
Brigette Romero, Jadira Aurora Fuentes Bautista, Victoria Beringer et al.· Cells· 0 citations
ProtScape, a multiscale graph-learning framework integrating global protein interactions, cell-type gene expression and protein language models to learn context-specific representations and infer interactomes across more than 200 cell types, substantially outperforms existing approaches in interaction reconstruction.
Alois Thomas, Lisa Fournier, Vincent Jung et al.· bioRxiv· 0 citations
It is shown that accurate representation of the bead background, which depends on the affinity matrix in use, is critical for elimination of false positive and false negative PPIs, as OGT PPI dynamics were measured under OGT catalytic inhibition via OSMI-4, which is known to perturb gene expression.
M. Brunelli, Lisa Morishita-Cartwright, Natalie M. Clark et al.· bioRxiv· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.