Dataset Information

A comparison and evaluation of five biclustering algorithms by quantifying goodness of biclusters for gene expression data.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Several biclustering algorithms have been proposed to identify biclusters, in which genes share similar expression patterns across a number of conditions. However, different algorithms would yield different biclusters and further lead to distinct conclusions. Therefore, some testing and comparisons between these algorithms are strongly required.

Methods

In this study, five biclustering algorithms (i.e. BIMAX, FABIA, ISA, QUBIC and SAMBA) were compared with each other in the cases where they were used to handle two expression datasets (GDS1620 and pathway) with different dimensions in Arabidopsis thaliana (A. thaliana)GO (gene ontology) annotation and PPI (protein-protein interaction) network were used to verify the corresponding biological significance of biclusters from the five algorithms. To compare the algorithms' performance and evaluate quality of identified biclusters, two scoring methods, namely weighted enrichment (WE) scoring and PPI scoring, were proposed in our study. For each dataset, after combining the scores of all biclusters into one unified ranking, we could evaluate the performance and behavior of the five biclustering algorithms in a better way.

Results

Both WE and PPI scoring methods has been proved effective to validate biological significance of the biclusters, and a significantly positive correlation between the two sets of scores has been tested to demonstrate the consistence of these two methods.A comparative study of the above five algorithms has revealed that: (1) ISA is the most effective one among the five algorithms on the dataset of GDS1620 and BIMAX outperforms the other algorithms on the dataset of pathway. (2) Both ISA and BIMAX are data-dependent. The former one does not work well on the datasets with few genes, while the latter one holds well for the datasets with more conditions. (3) FABIA and QUBIC perform poorly in this study and they may be suitable to large datasets with more genes and more conditions. (4) SAMBA is also data-independent as it performs well on two given datasets. The comparison results provide useful information for researchers to choose a suitable algorithm for each given dataset.

SUBMITTER: Li L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3447720 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A comparison and evaluation of five biclustering algorithms by quantifying goodness of biclusters for gene expression data.

Li Li L Guo Yang Y Wu Wenwu W Shi Youyi Y Cheng Jian J Tao Shiheng S

BioData mining 20120723 1

<h4>Background</h4>Several biclustering algorithms have been proposed to identify biclusters, in which genes share similar expression patterns across a number of conditions. However, different algorithms would yield different biclusters and further lead to distinct conclusions. Therefore, some testing and comparisons between these algorithms are strongly required.<h4>Methods</h4>In this study, five biclustering algorithms (i.e. BIMAX, FABIA, ISA, QUBIC and SAMBA) were compared with each other in ...[more]

PMID: 22824157

Similar Datasets

Project description:Gene clustering and sample clustering are commonly used to find patterns in gene expression datasets. However, genes may cluster differently in heterogeneous samples (e.g. different tissues or disease states), whilst traditional methods assume that clusters are consistent across samples. Biclustering algorithms aim to solve this issue by performing sample clustering and gene clustering simultaneously. Existing reviews of biclustering algorithms have yet to include a number of more recent algorithms and have based comparisons on simplistic simulated datasets without specific evaluation of biclusters in real datasets, using less robust metrics. We compared four classes of sparse biclustering algorithms on a range of simulated and real datasets. All algorithms generally struggled on simulated datasets with a large number of genes or implanted biclusters. We found that Bayesian algorithms with strict sparsity constraints had high accuracy on the simulated datasets and did not require any post-processing, but were considerably slower than other algorithm classes. We found that non-negative matrix factorisation algorithms performed poorly, but could be re-purposed for biclustering through a sparsity-inducing post-processing procedure we introduce; one such algorithm was one of the most highly ranked on real datasets. In a multi-tissue knockout mouse RNA-seq dataset, the algorithms rarely returned clusters containing samples from multiple different tissues, whilst such clusters were identified in a human dataset of more closely related cell types (sorted blood cell subsets). This highlights the need for further thought in the design and analysis of multi-tissue studies to avoid differences between tissues dominating the analysis. Code to run the analysis is available at https://github.com/nichollskc/biclust_comp, including wrappers for each algorithm, implementations of evaluation metrics, and code to simulate datasets and perform pre- and post-processing. The full tables of results are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4581206.

Project description:BackgroundAn important analysis performed on microarray gene-expression data is to discover biclusters, which denote groups of genes that are coherently expressed for a subset of conditions. Various biclustering algorithms have been proposed to find different types of biclusters from these real-valued gene-expression data sets. However, these algorithms suffer from several limitations such as inability to explicitly handle errors/noise in the data; difficulty in discovering small bicliusters due to their top-down approach; inability of some of the approaches to find overlapping biclusters, which is crucial as many genes participate in multiple biological processes. Association pattern mining also produce biclusters as their result and can naturally address some of these limitations. However, traditional association mining only finds exact biclusters, which limits its applicability in real-life data sets where the biclusters may be fragmented due to random noise/errors. Moreover, as they only work with binary or boolean attributes, their application on gene-expression data require transforming real-valued attributes to binary attributes, which often results in loss of information. Many past approaches have tried to address the issue of noise and handling real-valued attributes independently but there is no systematic approach that addresses both of these issues together.ResultsIn this paper, we first propose a novel error-tolerant biclustering model, 'ET-bicluster', and then propose a bottom-up heuristic-based mining algorithm to sequentially discover error-tolerant biclusters directly from real-valued gene-expression data. The efficacy of our proposed approach is illustrated by comparing it with a recent approach RAP in the context of two biological problems: discovery of functional modules and discovery of biomarkers. For the first problem, two real-valued S.Cerevisiae microarray gene-expression data sets are used to demonstrate that the biclusters obtained from ET-bicluster approach not only recover larger set of genes as compared to those obtained from RAP approach but also have higher functional coherence as evaluated using the GO-based functional enrichment analysis. The statistical significance of the discovered error-tolerant biclusters as estimated by using two randomization tests, reveal that they are indeed biologically meaningful and statistically significant. For the second problem of biomarker discovery, we used four real-valued Breast Cancer microarray gene-expression data sets and evaluate the biomarkers obtained using MSigDB gene sets.ConclusionsThe results obtained for both the problems: functional module discovery and biomarkers discovery, clearly signifies the usefulness of the proposed ET-bicluster approach and illustrate the importance of explicitly incorporating noise/errors in discovering coherent groups of genes from gene-expression data.

Dataset Information

A comparison and evaluation of five biclustering algorithms by quantifying goodness of biclusters for gene expression data.

Background

Methods

Results

Publications

A comparison and evaluation of five biclustering algorithms by quantifying goodness of biclusters for gene expression data.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets