Advertisement

Systems and Synthetic Biology

, Volume 6, Issue 1–2, pp 31–34 | Cite as

Systems biology beyond degree, hubs and scale-free networks: the case for multiple metrics in complex networks

  • Soumen Roy
Research Article

Abstract

Modeling and topological analysis of networks in biological and other complex systems, must venture beyond the limited consideration of very few network metrics like degree, betweenness or assortativity. A proper identification of informative and redundant entities from many different metrics, using recently demonstrated techniques, is essential. A holistic comparison of networks and growth models is best achieved only with the use of such methods.

Keywords

Systems biology Complex networks Multiple network metrics Hubs Scale-free networks 

References

  1. Agarwal S, Villar G, Jones NS (2010) High throughput network analysis. In: Proceedings of the workshop on analysis of complex networks (ACNE), European conference on machine learning and principles and practise of knowledge discovery in databases (ECML, PKDD), Barcelona, Spain, pp 13–18Google Scholar
  2. Albert R, Barabasi A-L (2002) Statistical mechanics of complex networks. Rev Mod Phys 74:47–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Albert R, Jeong H, Barabasi A-L (2000) Error and attack tolerance of complex networks. Nature 406:378–382PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bagler G, Sinha S (2007) Assortative mixing in protein contact networks and protein folding kinetics. Bioinformatics 23:1760–1767PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Banerjee A, Jost J (2009) Graph spectra as a systematic tool in computational biology. Discret Appl Math 157:2425–2431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bounova G, de Weck O (2012) Overview of metrics and their correlation patterns for multiple-metric topology analysis on heterogeneous graph ensembles. Phys Rev E 85:016117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clauset A, Shalizi CR, Newman MEJ (2009) Power-law distributions in empirical data. SIAM Rev 51:661–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Doyle JC et al (2005) The “robust yet fragile” nature of the Internet. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:14497–14502PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dunn R, Dudbridge F, Sanderson CM (2005) The use of edge-betweenness clustering to investigate biological function in protein interaction networks. BMC Bioinform 6:39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Edwards JS, Palsson BO (2000) The Escherichia coli MG1655 in silico metabolic genotype: its definition, characteristics, and capabilities. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:55285533Google Scholar
  11. Filkov V, Saul ZM, Roy S, D’Souza RM, Devanbu PT (2009) Modeling and verifying a broad array of network properties. EPL (Europhys Lett) 86:28003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Freeman LC (1977) A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry 40:35–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guimera R, Mossa S, Turtschi A, Amaral LAN (2005) The worldwide air transportation network: anomalous centrality, community structure, and cities’ global roles. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:7794–7799PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hahn MW, Kern AD (2005) Comparative genomics of centrality and essentiality in three eukaryotic protein-interaction networks. Mol Biol Evol 22:803–806PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hegde SR, Manimaran P, Mande SC (2008) Dynamic changes in protein functional linkage networks revealed by integration with gene expression data. PLoS Comput Biol 4(11):e1000237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jeong H, Mason SP, Barabasi A-L, Oltvai ZN (2001) Lethality and centrality in protein networks. Nature 411:41–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jolliffe IT (2002) Principal component analysis, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Joy MP, Brock A, Ingber DE, Huang S (2005) High-betweenness proteins in the yeast protein interaction network. J Biomed Biotech 2:96–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu J et al (2009) Analysis of drosophila segmentation network identifies a JNK pathway factor overexpressed in kidney cancer. Science 323:1218–1222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Newman MEJ (2002) Assortative mixing in networks. Phys Rev Lett 89:208701PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Newman MEJ (2010) Networks: an introduction. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  22. Pechenick DA, Payne JL, Moore JH (2012) The influence of assortativity on the robustness of signal-integration logic in gene regulatory networks J Theo Biol 296:21–32Google Scholar
  23. Perkins AD, Langston MA (2009) Threshold selection in gene co-expression networks using spectral graph theory techniques. BMC Bioinform 10(Suppl 11):S4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Roy S, Filkov V (2009) Strong associations between microbe phenotypes and their network architecture. Phys Rev E 80:040902 (R)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Segre D, Vitkup D, Church GM (2002) Analysis of optimality in natural and perturbed metabolic networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:1511215117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stelling J, Klamt S, Bettenbrock K, Schuster S, Gilles ED (2002) Metabolic network structure determines key aspects of functionality and regulation Nature 420:190193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Varma A, Palsson BO (1994) Metabolic flux balancingbasic concepts, scientific and practical use. Biotechnology 12:994–998Google Scholar
  28. Villar G, Agarwal S, Jones NS (2010) High throughput network analysis. In: Machine learning in systems biology (MLSB), Proceedings of the fourth international workshop, Edinburgh, Scotland, pp 5–7Google Scholar
  29. Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social network analysis. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  30. Wuellner DR, Roy S, D’Souza RM (2010) Resilience and rewiring of the passenger airline networks in the United States. Phys Rev E 82:056101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wunderlich Z, Mirny LA (2006) Using the topology of metabolic networks to predict viability of mutant strains. Biophys J 91:2304–2311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bose InstituteKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations