↓ Skip to main content

Predicting diabetes mellitus genes via protein-protein interaction and protein subcellular localization information

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Predicting diabetes mellitus genes via protein-protein interaction and protein subcellular localization information
Published in
BMC Genomics, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12864-016-2795-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiwei Tang, Xiaohua Hu, Xuejun Yang, Yetian Fan, Yongfan Li, Wei Hu, Yongzhong Liao, Ming cai Zheng, Wei Peng, Li Gao

Abstract

Diabetes mellitus characterized by hyperglycemia as a result of insufficient production of or reduced sensitivity to insulin poses a growing threat to the health of people. It is a heterogeneous disorder with multiple etiologies consisting of type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, gestational diabetes and so on. Diabetes-associated protein/gene prediction is a key step to understand the cellular mechanisms related to diabetes mellitus. Compared with experimental methods, computational predictions of candidate proteins/genes are cheaper and more effortless. Protein-protein interaction (PPI) data produced by the high-throughput technology have been used to prioritize candidate disease genes/proteins. However, the false interactions in the PPI data seriously hurt computational methods performance. In order to address that particular question, new methods are developed to identify candidate disease genes/proteins via integrating biological data from other sources. In this study, a new framework called PDMG is proposed to predict candidate disease genes/proteins. First, the weighted networks are building in terms of the combination of the subcellular localization information and PPI data. To form the weighted networks, the importance of each compartment is evaluated based on the number of interacted proteins in this compartment. This is because the very different roles played by different compartments in cell activities. Besides, some compartments are more important than others. Based on the evaluated compartments, the interactions between proteins are scored and the weighted PPI networks are constructed. Second, the known disease genes are extracted from OMIM database as the seed genes to expand disease-specific networks based on the weighted networks. Third, the weighted values between a protein and its neighbors in the disease-related networks are added together and the sum is as the score of the protein. Last but not least, the proteins are ranked based on descending order of their scores. The candidate proteins in the top are considered to be associated with the diseases and are potential disease-related proteins. Various types of data, such as type 2 diabetes-associated genes, subcellular localizations and protein interactions, are used to test PDMG method. The results show that the proteins/genes functionally exerting a direct influence over diabetes are consistently placed at the head of the queue. PDMG expands and ranks 445 candidate proteins from the seed set including original 27 type 2 diabetes proteins. Out of the top 27 proteins, 14 proteins are the real type 2 diabetes proteins. The literature extracted from the PubMed database has proved that, out of 13 novel proteins, 8 proteins are associated with diabetes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 20%
Student > Master 9 20%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Lecturer 2 4%
Student > Postgraduate 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 15 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 13%
Computer Science 5 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 16 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 August 2016.
All research outputs
#18,467,727
of 22,883,326 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#8,197
of 10,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#262,567
of 343,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#209
of 265 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,883,326 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,668 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,111 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 265 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.