Dataset Information

Selection of organisms for the co-evolution-based study of protein interactions.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The prediction and study of protein interactions and functional relationships based on similarity of phylogenetic trees, exemplified by the mirrortree and related methodologies, is being widely used. Although dependence between the performance of these methods and the set of organisms used to build the trees was suspected, so far nobody assessed it in an exhaustive way, and, in general, previous works used as many organisms as possible. In this work we asses the effect of using different sets of organism (chosen according with various phylogenetic criteria) on the performance of this methodology in detecting protein interactions of different nature.

Results

We show that the performance of three mirrortree-related methodologies depends on the set of organisms used for building the trees, and it is not always directly related to the number of organisms in a simple way. Certain subsets of organisms seem to be more suitable for the predictions of certain types of interactions. This relationship between type of interaction and optimal set of organism for detecting them makes sense in the light of the phylogenetic distribution of the organisms and the nature of the interactions.

Conclusions

In order to obtain an optimal performance when predicting protein interactions, it is recommended to use different sets of organisms depending on the available computational resources and data, as well as the type of interactions of interest.

SUBMITTER: Herman D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3179974 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Epistatic interactions between residues determine a protein's adaptability and shape its evolutionary trajectory. When a protein experiences a changed environment, it is under strong selection to find a peak in the new fitness landscape. It has been shown that strong selection increases epistatic interactions as well as the ruggedness of the fitness landscape, but little is known about how the epistatic interactions change under selection in the long-term evolution of a protein. Here we analyze the evolution of epistasis in the protease of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) using protease sequences collected for almost a decade from both treated and untreated patients, to understand how epistasis changes and how those changes impact the long-term evolvability of a protein. We use an information-theoretic proxy for epistasis that quantifies the co-variation between sites, and show that positive information is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition that detects epistasis in most cases. We analyze the "fossils" of the evolutionary trajectories of the protein contained in the sequence data, and show that epistasis continues to enrich under strong selection, but not for proteins whose environment is unchanged. The increase in epistasis compensates for the information loss due to sequence variability brought about by treatment, and facilitates adaptation in the increasingly rugged fitness landscape of treatment. While epistasis is thought to enhance evolvability via valley-crossing early-on in adaptation, it can hinder adaptation later when the landscape has turned rugged. However, we find no evidence that the HIV-1 protease has reached its potential for evolution after 9 years of adapting to a drug environment that itself is constantly changing. We suggest that the mechanism of encoding new information into pairwise interactions is central to protein evolution not just in HIV-1 protease, but for any protein adapting to a changing environment.

Project description:BackgroundProtein-protein interactions play vital roles in nearly all cellular processes and are involved in the construction of biological pathways such as metabolic and signal transduction pathways. Although large-scale experiments have enabled the discovery of thousands of previously unknown linkages among proteins in many organisms, the high-throughput interaction data is often associated with high error rates. Since protein interaction networks have been utilized in numerous biological inferences, the inclusive experimental errors inevitably affect the quality of such prediction. Thus, it is essential to assess the quality of the protein interaction data.ResultsIn this paper, a novel Bayesian network-based integrative framework is proposed to assess the reliability of protein-protein interactions. We develop a cross-species in silico model that assigns likelihood scores to individual protein pairs based on the information entirely extracted from model organisms. Our proposed approach integrates multiple microarray datasets and novel features derived from gene ontology. Furthermore, the confidence scores for cross-species protein mappings are explicitly incorporated into our model. Applying our model to predict protein interactions in the human genome, we are able to achieve 80% in sensitivity and 70% in specificity. Finally, we assess the overall quality of the experimentally determined yeast protein-protein interaction dataset. We observe that the more high-throughput experiments confirming an interaction, the higher the likelihood score, which confirms the effectiveness of our approach.ConclusionThis study demonstrates that model organisms certainly provide important information for protein-protein interaction inference and assessment. The proposed method is able to assess not only the overall quality of an interaction dataset, but also the quality of individual protein-protein interactions. We expect the method to continually improve as more high quality interaction data from more model organisms becomes available and is readily scalable to a genome-wide application.