Towards revealing the functions of all genes in plants

Trends in Plant Science

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 212-221

  Rhee, Seung Yon ^a   Mutwil, Marek ^b  

^a GEOPHYSICAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE OF MOLECULAR PLANT PHYSIOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Big data; Co expression; Co function; Function prediction; Networks; Omics

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; BIOLOGY; GENE REGULATORY NETWORK; GENETICS; PLANT;

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; GENE REGULATORY NETWORKS; PLANTS;

EID: 84897374792     PISSN: 13601385     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tplants.2013.10.006     Document Type: Review

References (101)

1. Lamesch P., et al. The Arabidopsis Information Resource (TAIR): improved gene annotation and new tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012, 40:D1202-D1210.
2. Youens-Clark K., et al. Gramene database in 2010: updates and extensions. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011, 39:D1085-D1094.
3. Bard J.B., Rhee S.Y. Ontologies in biology: design, applications and future challenges. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2004, 5:213-222.
4. Smith B., et al. The OBO Foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nat. Biotechnol. 2007, 25:1251-1255.
5. Ashburner M., et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat. Genet. 2000, 25:25-29.
6. Moss G.P. Enzyme Nomenclature 2013, http://www.chem.qmul.ac.uk/iubmb/enzyme/.
7. Saier M.H., et al. The Transporter Classification Database: recent advances. Nucleic Acids Res. 2009, 37:D274-D278.
8. Pujar A., et al. Whole-plant growth stage ontology for angiosperms and its application in plant biology. Plant Physiol. 2006, 142:414-428.
9. Ilic K., et al. The plant structure ontology, a unified vocabulary of anatomy and morphology of a flowering plant. Plant Physiol. 2007, 143:587-599.
10. Thimm O., et al. MAPMAN: a user-driven tool to display genomics data sets onto diagrams of metabolic pathways and other biological processes. Plant J. 2004, 37:914-939.
11. Rhee S.Y., et al. Use and misuse of the gene ontology annotations. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2008, 9:509-515.
12. Lee I., et al. Rational association of genes with traits using a genome-scale gene network for Arabidopsis thaliana. Nat. Biotechnol. 2010, 28:149-156.
13. Bassel G.W., et al. Systems analysis of plant functional, transcriptional, physical interaction, and metabolic networks. Plant Cell 2012, 24:3859-3875.
14. Csete M.E., Doyle J.C. Reverse engineering of biological complexity. Science 2002, 295:1664-1669.
15. Chou K.C., Shen H.B. Recent progress in protein subcellular location prediction. Anal. Biochem. 2007, 370:1-16.
16. Tian W., Skolnick J. How well is enzyme function conserved as a function of pairwise sequence identity?. J. Mol. Biol. 2003, 333:863-882.
17. Vazquez A., et al. Global protein function prediction from protein-protein interaction networks. Nat. Biotechnol. 2003, 21:697-700.
18. Pagani I., et al. The Genomes OnLine Database (GOLD) v.4: status of genomic and metagenomic projects and their associated metadata. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012, 40:D571-D579.
19. Schatz M.C., et al. Current challenges in de novo plant genome sequencing and assembly. Genome Biol. 2012, 13:243.
20. Altschul S.F., et al. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997, 25:3389-3402.
21. Quevillon E., et al. InterProScan: protein domains identifier. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005, 33:W116-W120.
22. Rost B. Enzyme function less conserved than anticipated. J. Mol. Biol. 2002, 318:595-608.
23. Galperin M.Y., et al. Analogous enzymes: independent inventions in enzyme evolution. Genome Res. 1998, 8:779-790.
24. Nakamura Y., et al. Rate and polarity of gene fusion and fission in Oryza sativa and Arabidopsis thaliana. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2007, 24:110-121.
25. Lee J.M., Sonnhammer E.L. Genomic gene clustering analysis of pathways in eukaryotes. Genome Res. 2003, 13:875-882.
26. Chu H.Y., et al. From hormones to secondary metabolism: the emergence of metabolic gene clusters in plants. Plant J. 2011, 66:66-79.
27. Pellegrini M., et al. Assigning protein functions by comparative genome analysis: protein phylogenetic profiles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96:4285-4288.
28. Gerdes S., et al. Synergistic use of plant-prokaryote comparative genomics for functional annotations. BMC Genomics 2011, 12(Suppl. 1):S2.
29. Wu L.F., et al. Large-scale prediction of Saccharomyces cerevisiae gene function using overlapping transcriptional clusters. Nat. Genet. 2002, 31:255-265.
30. Ryngajllo M., et al. SLocX: predicting subcellular localization of Arabidopsis proteins leveraging gene expression data. Front. Plant Sci. 2011, 2:43.
31. Persson S., et al. Identification of genes required for cellulose synthesis by regression analysis of public microarray data sets. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2005, 102:8633-8638.
32. Han X., et al. Co-expression analysis identifies CRC and AP1 the regulator of Arabidopsis fatty acid biosynthesis. J. Integr. Plant Biol. 2012, 54:486-499.
33. Maeda H., et al. Prephenate aminotransferase directs plant phenylalanine biosynthesis via arogenate. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2011, 7:19-21.
34. Ficklin S.P., Feltus F.A. Gene coexpression network alignment and conservation of gene modules between two grass species: maize and rice. Plant Physiol. 2011, 156:1244-1256.
35. Movahedi S., et al. Comparative network analysis reveals that tissue specificity and gene function are important factors influencing the mode of expression evolution in Arabidopsis and rice. Plant Physiol. 2011, 156:1316-1330.
36. Patel R.V., et al. BAR expressolog identification: expression profile similarity ranking of homologous genes in plant species. Plant J. 2012, 71:1038-1050.
37. Giorgi F.M., et al. Comparative study of RNA-seq- and microarray-derived coexpression networks in Arabidopsis thaliana. Bioinformatics 2013, 29:717-724.
38. Arabidopsis Interactome Mapping, C. (2011) Evidence for network evolution in an Arabidopsis interactome map. Science 333, 601-607.
39. Gavin A.C., et al. Proteome survey reveals modularity of the yeast cell machinery. Nature 2006, 440:631-636.
40. Meier M., et al. Proteome-wide protein interaction measurements of bacterial proteins of unknown function. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2013, 110:477-482.
41. Hishigaki H., et al. Assessment of prediction accuracy of protein function from protein-protein interaction data. Yeast 2001, 18:523-531.
42. Stark C., et al. The BioGRID Interaction Database: 2011 update. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011, 39:D698-D704.
43. Huang H., et al. Where have all the interactions gone? Estimating the coverage of two-hybrid protein interaction maps. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2007, 3:e214.
44. Hart G.T., et al. How complete are current yeast and human protein-interaction networks?. Genome Biol. 2006, 7:120.
45. Yu H., et al. High-quality binary protein interaction map of the yeast interactome network. Science 2008, 322:104-110.
46. Bandyopadhyay S., et al. Rewiring of genetic networks in response to DNA damage. Science 2010, 330:1385-1389.
47. Bassik M.C., et al. A systematic mammalian genetic interaction map reveals pathways underlying ricin susceptibility. Cell 2013, 152:909-922.
48. Babu M., et al. Genetic interaction maps in Escherichia coli reveal functional crosstalk among cell envelope biogenesis pathways. PLoS Genet. 2011, 7:e1002377.
49. Collins S.R., et al. From information to knowledge: new technologies for defining gene function. Nat. Methods 2009, 6:721-723.
50. Brylinski M., Skolnick J. A threading-based method (FINDSITE) for ligand-binding site prediction and functional annotation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2008, 105:129-134.
51. Roy A., et al. I-TASSER: a unified platform for automated protein structure and function prediction. Nat. Protoc. 2010, 5:725-738.
52. Drew K., et al. The Proteome Folding Project: proteome-scale prediction of structure and function. Genome Res. 2011, 21:1981-1994.
53. Pavlidis P., Gillis J. Progress and challenges in the computational prediction of gene function using networks. F1000 Res. 2012, 1:1-14.
54. De Bodt S., et al. CORNET: a user-friendly tool for data mining and integration. Plant Physiol. 2010, 152:1167-1179.
55. Warde-Farley D., et al. The GeneMANIA prediction server: biological network integration for gene prioritization and predicting gene function. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010, 38:W214-W220.
56. Klie S., et al. Inferring gene functions through dissection of relevance networks: interleaving the intra- and inter-species views. Mol. Biosyst. 2012, 8:2233-2241.
57. Radivojac P., et al. A large-scale evaluation of computational protein function prediction. Nat. Methods 2013, 10:221-227.
58. Franzosa E., et al. Computational reconstruction of protein-protein interaction networks: algorithms and issues. Methods Mol. Biol. 2009, 541:89-100.
59. Tian W., et al. Predicting gene function using omics data: from data preparation to data integration. Protein Function Prediction for Omics Era 2011, 215-242. Springer. D. Kihara (Ed.).
60. Schietgat L., et al. Predicting gene function using hierarchical multi-label decision tree ensembles. BMC Bioinformatics 2010, 11:2.
61. Cozzetto D., et al. Protein function prediction by massive integration of evolutionary analyses and multiple data sources. BMC Bioinformatics 2013, 14(Suppl. 3):S1.
62. Janga S.C., et al. Network-based function prediction and interactomics: the case for metabolic enzymes. Metab. Eng. 2011, 13:1-10.
63. Marbach D., et al. Wisdom of crowds for robust gene network inference. Nat. Methods 2012, 9:796-804.
64. Tanz S.K., et al. SUBA3: a database for integrating experimentation and prediction to define the SUBcellular location of proteins in Arabidopsis. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013, 41:D1185-D1191.
65. Kaundal R., et al. Combining machine learning and homology-based approaches to accurately predict subcellular localization in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2010, 154:36-54.
66. Li H., et al. TransportTP: a two-phase classification approach for membrane transporter prediction and characterization. BMC Bioinformatics 2009, 10:418.
67. Sharan R., et al. Network-based prediction of protein function. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2007, 3:88.
68. Handl J., et al. Computational cluster validation in post-genomic data analysis. Bioinformatics 2005, 21:3201-3212.
69. Adamcsek B., et al. CFinder: locating cliques and overlapping modules in biological networks. Bioinformatics 2006, 22:1021-1023.
70. Ackermann M., Strimmer K. A general modular framework for gene set enrichment analysis. BMC Bioinformatics 2009, 10:47.
71. Pereira-Leal J.B., et al. Detection of functional modules from protein interaction networks. Proteins 2004, 54:49-57.
72. Asthana S., et al. Predicting protein complex membership using probabilistic network reliability. Genome Res. 2004, 14:1170-1175.
73. Gilchrist E., Haughn G. Reverse genetics techniques: engineering loss and gain of gene function in plants. Brief. Funct. Genomics 2010, 9:103-110.
74. Al-Shahib A., et al. Feature selection and the class imbalance problem in predicting protein function from sequence. Appl. Bioinformatics 2005, 4:195-203.
75. Graur D., et al. On the immortality of television sets: "function" in the human genome according to the evolution-free gospel of ENCODE. Genome Biol. Evol. 2013, 5:578-590.
76. Yip K.Y., et al. Machine learning and genome annotation: a match meant to be?. Genome Biol. 2013, 14:205.
77. Ning K., et al. Examination of the relationship between essential genes in PPI network and hub proteins in reverse nearest neighbor topology. BMC Bioinformatics 2010, 11:505.
78. Wu X., Qi X. Genes encoding hub and bottleneck enzymes of the Arabidopsis metabolic network preferentially retain homeologs through whole genome duplication. BMC Evol. Biol. 2010, 10:145.
79. Manna B., et al. Evolutionary constraints on hub and non-hub proteins in human protein interaction network: insight from protein connectivity and intrinsic disorder. Gene 2009, 434:50-55.
80. Han J.D., et al. Evidence for dynamically organized modularity in the yeast protein-protein interaction network. Nature 2004, 430:88-93.
81. Fox A.D., et al. Connectedness of PPI network neighborhoods identifies regulatory hub proteins. Bioinformatics 2011, 27:1135-1142.
82. Arita M. The metabolic world of Escherichia coli is not small. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101:1543-1547.
83. Gillis J., Pavlidis P. Guilt by association" is the exception rather than the rule in gene networks. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2012, 8:e1002444.
84. Thibert B., et al. Improved prediction of critical residues for protein function based on network and phylogenetic analyses. BMC Bioinformatics 2005, 6:213.
85. Yao Q., et al. P(3)DB: an integrated database for plant protein phosphorylation. Front. Plant Sci. 2012, 3:206.
86. Cheng F., et al. Prediction of chemical-protein interactions network with weighted network-based inference method. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e41064.
87. O'Malley R.C., Ecker J.R. Epiallelic variation in Arabidopsis thaliana. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. 2012, 77:135-145.
88. Navlakha S., et al. A network-based approach for predicting missing pathway interactions. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2012, 8:e1002640.
89. Arighi C.N., et al. An overview of the BioCreative 2012 Workshop Track III: interactive text mining task. Database (Oxford) 2013, 2013:bas056.
90. Oliver S.L., et al. Using the iPlant collaborative discovery environment. Curr. Protoc. Bioinformatics 2013, 42:1-26.
91. Fiehn O. Metabolomics - the link between genotypes and phenotypes. Plant Mol. Biol. 2002, 48:155-171.
92. Heyndrickx K.S., Vandepoele K. Systematic identification of functional plant modules through the integration of complementary data sources. Plant Physiol. 2012, 159:884-901.
93. Obayashi T., et al. ATTED-II updates: condition-specific gene coexpression to extend coexpression analyses and applications to a broad range of flowering plants. Plant Cell Physiol. 2011, 52:213-219.
94. Kourmpetis Y.A., et al. Genome-wide computational function prediction of Arabidopsis proteins by integration of multiple data sources. Plant Physiol. 2011, 155:271-281.
95. Ogata Y., et al. CoP: a database for characterizing co-expressed gene modules with biological information in plants. Bioinformatics 2010, 26:1267-1268.
96. Bradford J.R., et al. GO-At: in silico prediction of gene function in Arabidopsis thaliana by combining heterogeneous data. Plant J. 2010, 61:713-721.
97. Mutwil M., et al. PlaNet: combined sequence and expression comparisons across plant networks derived from seven species. Plant Cell 2011, 23:895-910.
98. Bassel G.W., et al. Functional network construction in Arabidopsis using rule-based machine learning on large-scale data sets. Plant Cell 2011, 23:3101-3116.
99. Jupiter D., et al. STARNET 2: a web-based tool for accelerating discovery of gene regulatory networks using microarray co-expression data. BMC Bioinformatics 2009, 10:332.
100. Franceschini A., et al. STRING v9.1: protein-protein interaction networks, with increased coverage and integration. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013, 41:D808-D815.
101. Katari M.S., et al. VirtualPlant: a software platform to support systems biology research. Plant Physiol. 2010, 152:500-515.