Skip to main content

Interactomics: Interactions and Regulatory Networks

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Bioinformatics

Part of the book series: Computational Biology ((COBO,volume 21))

Abstract

This chapter deals with networks of various kinds, notably the network of protein–protein interactions and regulatory networks. The biophysicochemical aspects of the interactions, including specificity and cooperative binding, are discussed, followed by an account of the various in vivo and in vitro (including chromatography and biosensing) experimental methods that can be used to gather the primary data on interactions, from which interactomic inferences may follow.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Eukaryotic cells in particular are in a great deal more structured than the simple picture suggests: Filaments of various kinds (e.g., microtubules) appear to function inter alia as tracks along which certain molecules are transported to specific destinations. However, even in this case, the information-bearing (“signalling”) molecule has first to encounter, and bind to, the carrier molecule that will convey it along the track.

  2. 2.

    McConkey has coined the term “quinary structure” (of proteins) for this web of interactions.

  3. 3.

    This statement, the obvious corollary of the central dogma, is actually quite problematical—in the sense of having a rather ambiguous meaning—when scrutinized in detail. Many functionally relevant proteins are significantly modified (e.g., glycosylated) by enzymes after translation. Of course, these enzymes themselves are gene products.

  4. 4.

    Many transcription factors, for example, are multiprotein complexes.

  5. 5.

    Groups of operons controlled by a single transcription factor are called regulons; groups of regulons are called modulons.

  6. 6.

    After VohradskĂ˝ (2001).

  7. 7.

    Kitano (2002).

  8. 8.

    Vu and VohradskĂ˝ (2007).

  9. 9.

    In the literature, K is often loosely defined using Eq. (16.6) with concentrations rather than mole fractions, whereupon it loses its dimensionless quality.

  10. 10.

    Remarkable specificity is achievable (see, e.g., Popescu and Misevic 1997).

  11. 11.

    The dehydron (Sect. 11.5.2) is an underwrapped (i.e., underdesolvated) hydrogen bond and is a key determinant of protein affinity.

  12. 12.

    See, e.g., Ramsden (1984, 1986).

  13. 13.

    Hydrogen-bonding is a special example of Lewis acid–base (AB) or electron donor–acceptor (da) interactions.

  14. 14.

    See Ramsden (2000).

  15. 15.

    See, e.g., Kornyshev and Leikin (2001).

  16. 16.

    E.g. Ramsden and Dreier (1996) see Ramsden and Grätzel (1986) for a nonbiological example of the effect of dimensional reduction from 3 to 2.

  17. 17.

    See Ramsden (1994) for a comprehensive survey of all these and others.

  18. 18.

    Kozma et al. (2009).

  19. 19.

    A popular way to avoid the bioincompatibility of the gold or silver surface of the transducer required with SPR has been to coat it with a thick ( nm) layer of a biocompatible polysaccharide such as dextran, which forms a hydrogel, to which the target protein is bound. Unfortunately, this drastically changes the transport properties of the solution in the vicinity of the target (bound) protein (see Schuck 1996), which can lead to errors of up to several orders of magnitude in apparent binding constants (via a differential effect on \(k_\mathrm{a}\) and \(k_\mathrm{d}\)). Furthermore, such materials interact very strongly (via hydrogen bonds) with water, altering its hydrophilicity, with concomitant drastic changes to protein affinity, leading to further, possibly equally large, distortions in binding constant via its link to the free energy of interaction (\(\Delta G = -RT\ln K\)).

  20. 20.

    Section 14.5; the immobilization of proteins without altering their conformation, and hence association characteristics, is however more difficult than for nucleic acid oligomers.

  21. 21.

    See also Sect. 14.1 for limitations of the technique.

  22. 22.

    Jeong et al. (2001).

References

  • Jeong H, Mason SP, Barabási A-L, Oltvai ZN (2001) Lethality and centrality in protein networks. Nature 411:41–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitano H (2002) Systems biology: a brief overview. Science 295:1662–1664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kornyshev AA, Leikin S (2001) Sequence recognition in the pairing of DNA duplexes. Phys Rev Lett 86:3666–3669

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozma P, Hamori A, Cottier K, Kurunczi S, Horvath R (2009) Grating coupled interferometry for optical sensing. Appl Phys B 97:5–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popescu O, Misevic GN (1997) Self-recognition by proteoglycans. Nature 386:231–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden JJ (1984) The photolysis of small silver halide particles. Proc R Soc Lond A 392:427–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden JJ (1986) Computing photographic response curves. Proc R Soc Lond A 406:27–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden JJ (1994) Experimental methods for investigating protein adsorption kinetics at surfaces. Q Rev Biophys 27:41–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden JJ (2000) The specificity of biomolecular particle adhesion. Colloids Surf A 173:237–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden JJ, Dreier J (1996) Kinetics of the interaction between DNA and the type IC restriction enzyme EcoR124/3I. Biochemistry 35:3746–3753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden JJ, Grätzel M (1986) Formation and decay of methyl viologen radical cation dimers on the surface of colloidal CdS. Chem Phys Lett 132:269–272

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheller F, Schubert F (1989) Biosensoren. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuck P (1996) Kinetics of ligand binding to receptors immobilized in a polymer matrix, as detected with an evanescent wave biosensor. I. A computer simulation of the influence of mass transport. Biophys. J. 70 1230–1249

    Google Scholar 

  • VohradskĂ˝ J (2001) Neural network model of gene expression. FASEB J 15:846–854

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vu TT, VohradskĂ˝ J (2007) Nonlinear differential equation model for quantification of transcriptional regulation applied to microarray data of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nucleic Acids Res 35:279–287

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeremy Ramsden .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ramsden, J. (2015). Interactomics: Interactions and Regulatory Networks. In: Bioinformatics. Computational Biology, vol 21. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6702-0_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6702-0_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-6701-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-6702-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics