Discovering functional linkages and uncharacterized cellular pathways using phylogenetic profile comparisons: a comprehensive assessment
2007

Functional Linkages and Cellular Pathways in Proteins

Sample size: 95 publication 15 minutes Evidence: high

Author Information

Author(s): Jothi Raja, Przytycka Teresa M, Aravind L

Primary Institution: National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health

Hypothesis

The choice of reference genomes significantly affects the accuracy of functional linkage predictions in proteins.

Conclusion

Careful selection of informative genomes, rather than just the number of genomes, is crucial for improving the prediction accuracy of the phylogenetic profile comparison approach.

Supporting Evidence

  • The study found that prokaryotic genomes alone can provide sufficient information for accurate functional linkage predictions.
  • Adding too many eukaryotic genomes to the reference set can decrease prediction performance.
  • The predictive power of the phylogenetic profile comparison approach is influenced by the evolutionary history of the pathways being analyzed.

Takeaway

This study shows that to find out how proteins work together, we need to pick the right group of genomes to compare, not just a lot of them.

Methodology

The study used phylogenetic profile comparisons of proteins from E. coli and yeast across 16 different reference genome sets to assess functional linkages.

Potential Biases

The inclusion of closely related or parasitic genomes may not provide useful information and could skew results.

Limitations

The study's findings may not apply universally to all pathways or organisms, as the performance of the PPC approach varies significantly depending on the reference set used.

Participant Demographics

The study analyzed proteins from 95 different organisms, including 41 bacteria, 11 archaea, and 43 eukaryotes.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.001

Statistical Significance

p<0.001

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1186/1471-2105-8-173

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication