2016
DOI: 10.7554/elife.18715
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A computational interactome and functional annotation for the human proteome

Abstract: We present a database, PrePPI (Predicting Protein-Protein Interactions), of more than 1.35 million predicted protein-protein interactions (PPIs). Of these at least 127,000 are expected to constitute direct physical interactions although the actual number may be much larger (~500,000). The current PrePPI, which contains predicted interactions for about 85% of the human proteome, is related to an earlier version but is based on additional sources of interaction evidence and is far larger in scope. The use of str… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
84
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(84 citation statements)
references
References 77 publications
0
84
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This feature benefited from modeling with rice annotations and experimental data, allowing RicePPINet to discover PPIs specific for rice, which suggests that species‐specific modeling and optimization could effectively improve the accuracy and coverage of PPI prediction. In addition, we employed structural information in rice PPI prediction, which has been demonstrated to improve the reliability of predicted PPI networks by reducing false positives from a large number of non‐interacting protein pairs at the genome‐wide level (Zhang et al ., , ; Garzón et al ., ). All these factors contributed to the high predictability of RicePPINet for PPI discovery in rice.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This feature benefited from modeling with rice annotations and experimental data, allowing RicePPINet to discover PPIs specific for rice, which suggests that species‐specific modeling and optimization could effectively improve the accuracy and coverage of PPI prediction. In addition, we employed structural information in rice PPI prediction, which has been demonstrated to improve the reliability of predicted PPI networks by reducing false positives from a large number of non‐interacting protein pairs at the genome‐wide level (Zhang et al ., , ; Garzón et al ., ). All these factors contributed to the high predictability of RicePPINet for PPI discovery in rice.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…A critical advantage of structure‐based approaches is their ability to identify the putative conserved interface, providing more information than any non‐structure‐based methods. Structure‐based methods have been demonstrated to be powerful for PPI prediction in model organisms, including Arabidopsis (Zhang et al ., , ; Garzón et al ., ). The availability of structure‐based PPI network models of Arabidopsis should be useful for other plants such as rice, as many processes are conserved between the two species; however, some rice gene networks associated with specific phenotypes are different to that in Arabidopsis because of high levels of evolutionary diversity between these two model plants (Devos et al ., ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…They have also been used to predict PPIs for previously uncharacterized proteins, e.g. PrePPI [22][23][24]. Whereas it can be expected that these systematic PPI mapping projects will reach 2/32 saturation in the next few years, AP-MS and related approaches are fundamentally limited in their ability to detect compositional or abundance changes across multiple cell states and to detect concurrent changes in different complexes within the same sample.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Proteins binding with RNA through specific residues have a profound effect on many biological processes such as protein synthesis [1], post-transcriptional modifications, and regulation of gene expression [24]. Determining these protein-RNA binding residues can help to elucidate the underlying mechanisms, to control biological processes, or to design RNA-based drug.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A series of machine learning methods [6] such as Naive Bayes, support vector machine (SVM), and random forest (RF), combined with amino acid sequence or protein three-dimensional structural characteristics [4, 7], have been proposed to identify RNA-binding residues. Jeong et al [8] build a neural network classifier to predict RNA-binding residues based on protein sequence and structural information.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%