↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

From Hub Proteins to Hub Modules: The Relationship Between Essentiality and Centrality in the Yeast Interactome at Different Scales of Organization

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
citeulike
8 CiteULike
Title
From Hub Proteins to Hub Modules: The Relationship Between Essentiality and Centrality in the Yeast Interactome at Different Scales of Organization
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, February 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002910
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jimin Song, Mona Singh

Abstract

Numerous studies have suggested that hub proteins in the S. cerevisiae physical interaction network are more likely to be essential than other proteins. The proposed reasons underlying this observed relationship between topology and functioning have been subject to some controversy, with recent work suggesting that it arises due to the participation of hub proteins in essential complexes and processes. However, do these essential modules themselves have distinct network characteristics, and how do their essential proteins differ in their topological properties from their non-essential proteins? We aimed to advance our understanding of protein essentiality by analyzing proteins, complexes and processes within their broader functional context and by considering physical interactions both within and across complexes and biological processes. In agreement with the view that essentiality is a modular property, we found that the number of intracomplex or intraprocess interactions that a protein has is a better indicator of its essentiality than its overall number of interactions. Moreover, we found that within an essential complex, its essential proteins have on average more interactions, especially intracomplex interactions, than its non-essential proteins. Finally, we built a module-level interaction network and found that essential complexes and processes tend to have higher interaction degrees in this network than non-essential complexes and processes; that is, they exhibit a larger amount of functional cross-talk than their non-essential counterparts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 2 2%
Germany 2 2%
Spain 2 2%
Korea, Republic of 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
India 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 69 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 33%
Researcher 13 16%
Student > Master 9 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 5 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 41 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 21%
Computer Science 7 9%
Engineering 2 2%
Chemistry 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 7 9%