Investigating Topological and Functional Features of Multimodular Proteins

Overview

Journal J Biomed Biotechnol

Specialty Biology

Date 2010 Jan 14

PMID 20069113

Citations 1

Authors

Zelmina Lubovac

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

To generate functional modules as functionally and structurally cohesive formations in protein interaction networks (PINs) constitutes an important step towards understanding how modules communicate on a higher level of the PIN organisation that underlies cell functionality. However, we need to understand how individual modules communicate and are organized into the higher-order structure(s) of the PIN organization that underlies cell functionality. In an attempt to contribute to this understanding, we make an assumption that the proteins reappearing in several modules, termed here as multimodular proteins (MMPs), may be useful in building higher-order structure(s) as they may constitute communication points between different modules. In this paper, we investigate common properties shared by these proteins and compare them with the properties of so-called single-modular proteins (SMPs) by analyzing three aspects: functional aspect, that is, annotation of the proteins, topological aspect that is betweenness centrality of the proteins, and lethality. Furthermore, we investigate the interconnectivity role of some proteins that are identified as functionally and topologically important.

Citing Articles

A Cancer Gene Module Mining Method Based on Bio-Network of Multi-Omics Gene Groups.

Wang C, Zhao N, Sun K, Zhang Y Front Oncol. 2020; 10:1159.

PMID: 32637361 PMC: 7317001. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.01159.

References

von Mering C, Krause R, Snel B, Cornell M, Oliver S, Fields S . Comparative assessment of large-scale data sets of protein-protein interactions. Nature. 2002; 417(6887):399-403. DOI: 10.1038/nature750. View

Mendenhall M, Hodge A . Regulation of Cdc28 cyclin-dependent protein kinase activity during the cell cycle of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 1998; 62(4):1191-243. PMC: 98944. DOI: 10.1128/MMBR.62.4.1191-1243.1998. View

Rives A, Galitski T . Modular organization of cellular networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003; 100(3):1128-33. PMC: 298738. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0237338100. View

Tang H, Cai M . The EH-domain-containing protein Pan1 is required for normal organization of the actin cytoskeleton in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Cell Biol. 1996; 16(9):4897-914. PMC: 231492. DOI: 10.1128/MCB.16.9.4897. View

Hsu C, Juan H, Huang H . Characterization of microRNA-regulated protein-protein interaction network. Proteomics. 2008; 8(10):1975-9. DOI: 10.1002/pmic.200701004. View

Xenarios I, Rice D, Salwinski L, Baron M, Marcotte E, Eisenberg D . DIP: the database of interacting proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 1999; 28(1):289-91. PMC: 102387. DOI: 10.1093/nar/28.1.289. View

Yook S, Oltvai Z, Barabasi A . Functional and topological characterization of protein interaction networks. Proteomics. 2004; 4(4):928-42. DOI: 10.1002/pmic.200300636. View

Lubovac Z, Gamalielsson J, Olsson B . Combining functional and topological properties to identify core modules in protein interaction networks. Proteins. 2006; 64(4):948-59. DOI: 10.1002/prot.21071. View

Hartwell L, Hopfield J, Leibler S, Murray A . From molecular to modular cell biology. Nature. 1999; 402(6761 Suppl):C47-52. DOI: 10.1038/35011540. View

10.

Han J, Bertin N, Hao T, Goldberg D, Berriz G, Zhang L . Evidence for dynamically organized modularity in the yeast protein-protein interaction network. Nature. 2004; 430(6995):88-93. DOI: 10.1038/nature02555. View

11.

Pereira-Leal J, Enright A, Ouzounis C . Detection of functional modules from protein interaction networks. Proteins. 2004; 54(1):49-57. DOI: 10.1002/prot.10505. View

12.

Bader G, Hogue C . An automated method for finding molecular complexes in large protein interaction networks. BMC Bioinformatics. 2003; 4:2. PMC: 149346. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-4-2. View

13.

Ito T, Chiba T, Ozawa R, Yoshida M, Hattori M, Sakaki Y . A comprehensive two-hybrid analysis to explore the yeast protein interactome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001; 98(8):4569-74. PMC: 31875. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.061034498. View

14.

Mewes H, Frishman D, Guldener U, Mannhaupt G, Mayer K, Mokrejs M . MIPS: a database for genomes and protein sequences. Nucleic Acids Res. 2001; 30(1):31-4. PMC: 99165. DOI: 10.1093/nar/30.1.31. View

15.

Spirin V, Mirny L . Protein complexes and functional modules in molecular networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003; 100(21):12123-8. PMC: 218723. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2032324100. View

16.

Przulj N, Wigle D, Jurisica I . Functional topology in a network of protein interactions. Bioinformatics. 2004; 20(3):340-8. DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btg415. View

17.

Deane C, Salwinski L, Xenarios I, Eisenberg D . Protein interactions: two methods for assessment of the reliability of high throughput observations. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2002; 1(5):349-56. DOI: 10.1074/mcp.m100037-mcp200. View

18.

Petti A, Church G . A network of transcriptionally coordinated functional modules in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genome Res. 2005; 15(9):1298-306. PMC: 1199545. DOI: 10.1101/gr.3847105. View

19.

Ravasz E, Somera A, Mongru D, Oltvai Z, Barabasi A . Hierarchical organization of modularity in metabolic networks. Science. 2002; 297(5586):1551-5. DOI: 10.1126/science.1073374. View

20.

Yu H, Kim P, Sprecher E, Trifonov V, Gerstein M . The importance of bottlenecks in protein networks: correlation with gene essentiality and expression dynamics. PLoS Comput Biol. 2007; 3(4):e59. PMC: 1853125. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030059. View