Predicting co-complexed protein pairs using genomic and proteomic data integration

BACKGROUND: Identifying all protein-protein interactions in an organism is a major objective of proteomics. A related goal is to know which protein pairs are present in the same protein complex. High-throughput methods such as yeast two-hybrid (Y2H) and affinity purification coupled with mass spectrometry (APMS) have been used to detect interacting proteins on a genomic scale. However, both Y2H and APMS methods have substantial false-positive rates. Aside from high-throughput interaction screens, other gene- or protein-pair characteristics may also be informative of physical interaction. Therefore it is desirable to integrate multiple datasets and utilize their different predictive value for more accurate prediction of co-complexed relationship. RESULTS: Using a supervised machine learning approach – probabilistic decision tree, we integrated high-throughput protein interaction datasets and other gene- and protein-pair characteristics to predict co-complexed pairs (CCP) of proteins. Our predictions proved more sensitive and specific than predictions based on Y2H or APMS methods alone or in combination. Among the top predictions not annotated as CCPs in our reference set (obtained from the MIPS complex catalogue), a significant fraction was found to physically interact according to a separate database (YPD, Yeast Proteome Database), and the remaining predictions may potentially represent unknown CCPs. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that the probabilistic decision tree approach can be successfully used to predict co-complexed protein (CCP) pairs from other characteristics. Our top-scoring CCP predictions provide testable hypotheses for experimental validation

Prediction of protein-protein interactions using one-class classification methods and integrating diverse data

This research addresses the problem of prediction of protein-protein interactions (PPI) when integrating diverse kinds of biological information. This task has been commonly viewed as a binary classification problem (whether any two proteins do or do not interact) and several different machine learning techniques have been employed to solve this task. However the nature of the data creates two major problems which can affect results. These are firstly imbalanced class problems due to the number of positive examples (pairs of proteins which really interact) being much smaller than the number of negative ones. Secondly the selection of negative examples can be based on some unreliable assumptions which could introduce some bias in the classification results. Here we propose the use of one-class classification (OCC) methods to deal with the task of prediction of PPI. OCC methods utilise examples of just one class to generate a predictive model which consequently is independent of the kind of negative examples selected; additionally these approaches are known to cope with imbalanced class problems. We have designed and carried out a performance evaluation study of several OCC methods for this task, and have found that the Parzen density estimation approach outperforms the rest. We also undertook a comparative performance evaluation between the Parzen OCC method and several conventional learning techniques, considering different scenarios, for example varying the number of negative examples used for training purposes. We found that the Parzen OCC method in general performs competitively with traditional approaches and in many situations outperforms them. Finally we evaluated the ability of the Parzen OCC approach to predict new potential PPI targets, and validated these results by searching for biological evidence in the literature

Choosing negative examples for the prediction of protein-protein interactions

The protein-protein interaction networks of even well-studied model organisms are sketchy at best, highlighting the continued need for computational methods to help direct experimentalists in the search for novel interactions. This need has prompted the development of a number of methods for predicting protein-protein interactions based on various sources of data and methodologies. The common method for choosing negative examples for training a predictor of protein-protein interactions is based on annotations of cellular localization, and the observation that pairs of proteins that have different localization patterns are unlikely to interact. While this method leads to high quality sets of non-interacting proteins, we find that this choice can lead to biased estimates of prediction accuracy, because the constraints placed on the distribution of the negative examples makes the task easier. The effects of this bias are demonstrated in the context of both sequence-based and non-sequence based features used for predicting protein-protein interactions

Deciphering Protein–Protein Interactions. Part II. Computational Methods to Predict Protein and Domain Interaction Partners

Recent advances in high-throughput experimental methods for the identification of protein interactions have resulted in a large amount of diverse data that are somewhat incomplete and contradictory. As valuable as they are, such experimental approaches studying protein interactomes have certain limitations that can be complemented by the computational methods for predicting protein interactions. In this review we describe different approaches to predict protein interaction partners as well as highlight recent achievements in the prediction of specific domains mediating protein-protein interactions. We discuss the applicability of computational methods to different types of prediction problems and point out limitations common to all of them

Application of machine learning in SNP discovery

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) constitute more than 90% of the genetic variation, and hence can account for most trait differences among individuals in a given species. Polymorphism detection software PolyBayes and PolyPhred give high false positive SNP predictions even with stringent parameter values. We developed a machine learning (ML) method to augment PolyBayes to improve its prediction accuracy. ML methods have also been successfully applied to other bioinformatics problems in predicting genes, promoters, transcription factor binding sites and protein structures.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The ML program C4.5 was applied to a set of features in order to build a SNP classifier from training data based on human expert decisions (True/False). The training data were 27,275 candidate SNP generated by sequencing 1973 STS (sequence tag sites) (12 Mb) in both directions from 6 diverse homozygous soybean cultivars and PolyBayes analysis. Test data of 18,390 candidate SNP were generated similarly from 1359 additional STS (8 Mb). SNP from both sets were classified by experts. After training the ML classifier, it agreed with the experts on 97.3% of test data compared with 7.8% agreement between PolyBayes and experts. The PolyBayes positive predictive values (PPV) (i.e., fraction of candidate SNP being real) were 7.8% for all predictions and 16.7% for those with 100% posterior probability of being real. Using ML improved the PPV to 84.8%, a 5- to 10-fold increase. While both ML and PolyBayes produced a similar number of true positives, the ML program generated only 249 false positives as compared to 16,955 for PolyBayes. The complexity of the soybean genome may have contributed to high false SNP predictions by PolyBayes and hence results may differ for other genomes.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>A machine learning (ML) method was developed as a supplementary feature to the polymorphism detection software for improving prediction accuracies. The results from this study indicate that a trained ML classifier can significantly reduce human intervention and in this case achieved a 5–10 fold enhanced productivity. The optimized feature set and ML framework can also be applied to all polymorphism discovery software. ML support software is written in Perl and can be easily integrated into an existing SNP discovery pipeline.</p

Computational verification of protein-protein interactions by orthologous co-expression

BACKGROUND: High-throughput methods identify an overwhelming number of protein-protein interactions. However, the limited accuracy of these methods results in the false identification of many spurious interactions. Accordingly, the resulting interactions are regarded as hypothetical and computational methods are needed to increase their confidence. Several methods have recently been suggested for this purpose including co-expression as a confidence measure for interacting proteins, but their performance is still quite poor. RESULTS: We introduce a novel computational method for verification of protein-protein interactions based on the co-expression of orthologs of interacting partners. The performance of our method is analysed using known S. cerevisiae interactions, and is shown to overcome limitations of previous methods. We present specific examples of known and putative interactions that are detected by our method and not by previous methods, and suggest that they represent transient interactions that might have been conserved and stabilized in other species. CONCLUSION: Co-expression of orthologous protein-pairs can be used to increase the confidence of hypothetical protein-protein interactions in S. cerevisiae as well as in other species. This approach may be especially useful for species with no available expression profiles and for transient interactions

Semi-supervised multi-task learning for predicting interactions between HIV-1 and human proteins

Motivation: Protein–protein interactions (PPIs) are critical for virtually every biological function. Recently, researchers suggested to use supervised learning for the task of classifying pairs of proteins as interacting or not. However, its performance is largely restricted by the availability of truly interacting proteins (labeled). Meanwhile, there exists a considerable amount of protein pairs where an association appears between two partners, but not enough experimental evidence to support it as a direct interaction (partially labeled)