+ All Categories
Home > Documents > V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

Date post: 21-Jan-2016
Category:
Upload: eitan
View: 28 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction. Typical promoter region of a prokaryotic gene. The TTGACA and TATAAT sequences at positions -35 and -10 nucleotides are not essential. The preference for the correspon-ding nucleotide at each position is between 50 and 80%. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Popular Tags:
45
10. Lecture WS 2008/09 Bioinformatics III 1 V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction Typical promoter region of a prokaryotic gene. The TTGACA and TATAAT sequences at positions -35 and -10 nucleotides are not essential. The preference for the correspon-ding nucleotide at each position is between 50 and 80%. Example of a gene regulatory network. Solid arrows indicate direct associations between genes and proteins (via transcription and translation), between proteins and proteins (via direct physical interactions), between proteins and metabolites (via direct physical interactions or with proteins acting as enzymatic catalysts), and the effect of metabolite binding to genes (via direct interactions). Lines show direct effects, with arrows standing for activation, and bars for inhibition. The dashed lines represent indirect associations between genes that result from the projection onto 'gene space'. For example, gene 1 deactivates gene 2 via protein 1 resulting in an indirect interaction between gene 1 and gene 2 (drawn after [Brazhnik00]).
Transcript
Page 1: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 1

V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

Typical promoter region of a prokaryotic gene. The TTGACA and TATAAT sequences at positions -35 and -10 nucleotides are not essential. The preference for the correspon-ding nucleotide at each position is between 50 and 80%.

Example of a gene regulatory network. Solid arrows indicate direct associations between genes and proteins (via transcription and translation), between proteins and proteins (via direct physical interactions), between proteins and metabolites (via direct physical interactions or with proteins acting as enzymatic catalysts), and the effect of metabolite binding to genes (via direct interactions). Lines show direct effects, with arrows standing for activation, and bars for inhibition. The dashed lines represent indirect associations between genes that result from the projection onto 'gene space'. For example, gene 1 deactivates gene 2 via protein 1 resulting in an indirect interaction between gene 1 and gene 2 (drawn after [Brazhnik00]).

Page 2: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 2

V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - Introduction

Graph representation of the gene network corresponding to the biochemical network from previous page. This figure corresponds to the lowest tier of that figure. Most genes in gene networks will have a negative effect on their own concentration because the degradation rate of their mRNA is proportional to their concentration (drawn after [Brazhnik00]).

Discovering the true connectivities from gene expression data is not trivial.

Here, three different gene connectivities may lead to similar observed co-expression patterns.

Page 3: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 3

Transcriptional regulatory network of E. coli

RegulonDB: database with information on transcriptional regulation and operon

organization in E.coli; 105 regulators affecting 749 genes

7 regulatory proteins (CRP, FNR, IHF, FIS, ArcA, NarL and Lrp) are sufficient

to directly modulate the expression of more than half of all E.coli genes.

Out-going connectivity follows a

power-law distribution In-coming connectivity follows

exponential distribution (Shen-Orr).

Martinez-Antonio, Collado-Vides, Curr Opin Microbiol 6, 482 (2003)

Page 4: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 4

Structural organization of transcription/regulatory networks

Modules: observation that reg. Networks are highly interconnected, very few

modules can be entirely separated from the rest of the network.

Babu et al. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 14, 283 (2004)

Page 5: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 5

Frequency of co-regulation

Regulation by multiple TFs occurs in half of genes.

In most cases, a „gobal“ regulator (with > 10 interactions) works together with a

more specific local regulator.

Martinez-Antonio, Collado-Vides, Curr Opin Microbiol 6, 482 (2003)

Page 6: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 6

Regulation of TFs and club co-regulation

However, in a process of decisions and

information flux, the number of controlled

or affected elements is not the only factor

to be considered.

A hierarchy of different levels of decision

is natural to our understanding of how

things get done.

In general, global regulators work

together with other global regulators.

Dynamics of decison-making is a

cooperative process of different

subsets of the network put into action

at certain moments.

Martinez-Antonio, Collado-Vides, Curr Opin Microbiol 6, 482 (2003)

Page 7: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 7

Response to changes in environmental conditions

The second function of TFs is to sense changes in environmental conditions or

other internal signals encoding changes.

Martinez-Antonio, Collado-Vides, Curr Opin Microbiol 6, 482 (2003)

Global environment growth conditions in which TFs are regulating.

# in brackets indicates how many additional TFs participate in the

same number of conditions.

Page 8: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 8

Evolution of the gene regulatory network

Larger genomes tend to have more TFs per gene.

Babu et al. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 14, 283 (2004)

Page 9: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 9

Do we need to rely on experiments?

Determine homology between the domains and protein families

of TFs and regulated genes

and proteins of known 3D structure.

Determine uncharacterized E.coli proteins with

DNA-binding domains, thus identify large majority

of E.coli TFs.

Finding: 75% of all TFs are two-domain proteins.

Analysis of domain architecture shows that 75% of

the TFs have arisen by gene duplication.

Babu, Teichmann, Nucl. Acid Res. 31, 1234 (2003)

Sarah Teichmann

MRC LMB Cambridge

Madan Babu,

PhD student at LMB

Page 10: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 10

Flow chart of method to identify TFs in E.coli

SUPERFAMILY database (C. Chothia)

contains a library of HMM models based

on the sequences of proteins in SCOP for

predicted proteins of completely

sequenced genomes.

In addition to our set of 271 transcription

factors, there are eight transcription

factors without a DBD assignment that

have known regulatory information.

Remove all DNA-binding proteins involved

in replication/repair etc.

Babu, Teichmann, Nucl. Acid Res. 31, 1234 (2003)

Page 11: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 11

3D structures of putative (and real) TFs in E.coli

The three-dimensional

structures of the 11 DBD

families seen in the 271

identified transcription

factors in E.coli. The

figure highlights the fact

that even though the

helix–turn–helix motif

occurs in all families

except the nucleic acid

binding family, the

scaffolds in which the

motif occurs are very

different.

Babu, Teichmann, Nucl. Acid Res. 31, 1234 (2003)

Page 12: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 12

Domain architectures of TFs

The 74 unique domain architectures of the 271

identified TFs. Each functional class is represented by

a different shape and each family within the functional

class is represented by a different colour.

The DBDs are represented as rectangles. The partner

domains are represented as hexagons (small

molecule-binding domain), triangles (enzyme

domains), circles (protein interaction domain),

diamonds (domains of unknown function) and the

receiver domain has a pentagonal shape.

The letters A, R, D and U denote activators,

repressors, dual regulators and TFs of unknown

function, and the number of TFs of each type is given

next to each domain architecture.

Architectures of known 3D structure are denoted by

asterisks, and ‘+’ are cases where the regulatory

function of a TF has been inferred by indirect methods,

so that the DNA-binding site is not known.

Babu, Teichmann, Nucl. Acid Res. 31, 1234 (2003)

Page 13: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 13

Evolution of TFs

10% 1-domain proteins

75% 2-domain proteins

12% 3-domain proteins

3% 4-domain proteins

TFs have evolved by extensive recombination of domains.

Proteins with the same sequential arrangement of domains are likely to be direct

duplicates of each other.

74 distinct domain architectures have duplicated to give rise to 271 TFs.

Babu, Teichmann, Nucl. Acid Res. 31, 1234 (2003)

Page 14: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 14

Organisation of transcriptional regulatory network

For 121 TFs, there is information on their regulated genes.

They can be divided into 10 general functional categories.

Babu, Teichmann, Nucl. Acid Res. 31, 1234 (2003)

Page 15: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 15

Regulatory cascades

The TF regulatory network in E.coli.

When more than one TF regulates a gene,

the order of their binding sites is as given in

the figure. An arrowhead is used to indicate

positive regulation when the position of the

binding site is known.

Horizontal bars indicates negative regulation

when the position of the binding site is

known. In cases where only the nature of

regulation is known, without binding site

information, + and – are used to indicate

positive and negative regulation.

The DBD families are indicated by circles of

different colours as given in the key. The

names of global regulators are in bold.

Babu, Teichmann, Nucl. Acid Res. 31, 1234 (2003)

Page 16: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 16

Design principles of regulatory networks

Wiring diagrams of regulatory networks resemble somehow electrical circuits.

Try to break down networks into basic building blocks.

Search for „network motifs“ as patterns of interconnections that recur in many

different parts of a network at frequencies much higher than those found in

randomized networks.

Shen-Orr et al. Nature Gen. 31, 64 (2002)

Uri Alon

Weizman Institute

Page 17: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 17

Detection of motifs

Represent transcriptional network as a connectivity matrix M

such that Mij = 1 if operon j encodes a TF that transcriptionally regulates operon i

and Mij = 0 otherwise.

Scan all n × n submatrices of M generated

by choosing n nodes that lie in a connected

graph, for n = 3 and n = 4.

Submatrices were enumerated efficiently by

recursively searching for nonzero elements.

Compute a P value for submatrices representing each type of connected subgraph

by comparing # of times they appear in real network vs. in random network.

For n = 3, the only significant motif is the feedforward loop.

For n = 4, only the overlapping regulation motif is significant.

SIMs and multi-input modules were identified by searching for identical rows of M.Shen-Orr et al. Nature Gen. 31, 64 (2002)

Connectivity matrix for causal regulation of transcription factor j (row) by transcription factor i (column). Dark fields indicate regulation. (Left) Feed-forward loop motif. TF 2 regulates TFs 3 and 6, and TF 3 again regulates TF 6. (Middle) Single-input multiple-output motif. (Right)

Densely-overlapping region.

Page 18: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 18

DOR detection

Consider all operons regulated by ≥ 2 TFs.

Define (nonmetric) distance measure between operons k and j, based on the # of

TFs regulating both operons:

d(k,j) = 1/ (1+n fnMk,n Mj,n)2)

Where fn = 0.5 for global TFs and fn = 1 otherwise.

Cluster operons with average-linkage algorithm.

DORs correspond to clusters with more than 10 connections

with a ratio of connections to TFs > 2.

Shen-Orr et al. Nature Gen. 31, 64 (2002)

Page 19: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 19

Network motifs found in E.coli transcript-regul network

a, Feedforward loop: a TF X regulates a second TF

Y, and both jointly regulate one or more operons

Z1...Zn.b, Example of a feedforward loop (L-arabinose utilization).

c, SIM motif: a single TF, X, regulates a set of

operons Z1...Zn. X is usually autoregulatory. All

regulations are of the same sign. No other

transcription factor regulates the operons.

d, Example of a SIM system (arginine biosynthesis).

e, DOR motif: a set of operons Z1...Zm are each

regulated by a combination of a set of input

transcription factors, X1...Xn. DOR-algorithm detects

dense regions of connections, with a high ratio of

connections to transcription factors. f, Example of a DOR (stationary phase response).

Shen-Orr et al. Nature Gen. 31, 64 (2002)

Page 20: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 20

Significance of motifs

Shen-Orr et al. Nature Gen. 31, 64 (2002)

Page 21: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 21

Regulatory network

Shen-Orr et al. Nature Gen. 31, 64 (2002)

Each TF appears only in a single subgraph except for

global TFs that can appear in several subgraphs.

Page 22: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 22

Most research on biological networks has been focused on static topological

properties, describing networks as collections of nodes and edges rather than as

dynamic structural entities.

Here this study focusses on the temporal aspects of networks, which allows us to

study the dynamics of protein complex assembly during the Saccharomyces

cerevisiae cell cycle.

The integrative approach combines protein-protein interactions with information on

the timing of the transcription of specific genes during the cell cycle, obtained from

DNA microarray time series shown before.

a quality-controlled set of 600

periodically expressed genes,

each assigned to the point in the

cell cycle where its expression peaks.

Analysis of complexome during cell cycle

Science 307, 724 (2005)

Ulrik Lichtenberg Peer Bork

Page 23: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 23

Temporal protein interaction network in yeast cell cycle

Cell cycle proteins that are part

of complexes or other physical

interactions are shown within

the circle.

For the dynamic proteins, the

time of peak expression is

shown by the node color;

static proteins are represented

as white nodes.

Outside the circle, the dynamic

proteins without interactions

are positioned and colored

according to their peak time.

Science 307, 724 (2005)

Page 24: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 24

Just-in-time synthesis vs. just-in-time-assembly

Transcription of cell cycle–regulated genes is generally thought to be turned on

when or just before their protein products are needed: often referred to as

just-in-time synthesis.

Contrary to the cell cycle in bacteria, however, just-in-time synthesis of entire

complexes is rarely observed in the network. The only large complex to be

synthesized in its entirety just in time is the nucleosome, all subunits of which are

expressed in S phase to produce nucleosomes during DNA replication.

Instead, the general design principle appears to be that only some subunits of

each complex are transcriptionally regulated in order to control the timing of

final assembly.

Science 307, 724 (2005)

Page 25: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 25

Integrate transcriptional regulatory information and gene-expression data for

multiple conditions in Saccharomyces cerevisae.

5 conditions cell cycle

sporulation

diauxic shift

DNA damage

stress response

Something spectacular at the end

Luscombe, Babu, … Teichmann, Gerstein, Nature 431, 308 (2004)

Sarah Teichmann Mark Gerstein

Page 26: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 26

SANDY: topological measures + network motifs

Luscombe et al. Nature 431, 308 (2004)

+ some post-analysis

Page 27: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 27

Dynamic representation of transript. regul. network

c, Standard statistics (global topological measures and local network motifs) describing network structures. These vary between endogenous and exogenous conditions; those that are high compared with other conditions are shaded. (Note, the graph for the static state displays only sections that are active in at least one condition, but the table provides statistics for the entire network including inactive regions.)

Luscombe, Babu, … Teichmann, Gerstein, Nature 431, 308 (2004)

a, Schematics and summary of properties for the endogenous and exogenous sub-networks.

b, Graphs of the static and condition-specific networks. Transcription factors and target genes are shown as nodes in the upper and lower sections of each graph respectively, and regulatory interactions are drawn as edges; they are coloured by the number of conditions in which they are active. Different conditions use distinct sections of the network.

Page 28: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 28

Luscombe et al. Nature 431, 308 (2004)

Interpretation

Half of the targets are uniquely expressed in only one condition; in contrast, most

TFs are used across multiple processes.

The active sub-networks maintain or rewire regulatory interactions, over half of

the active interactions are completely supplanted by new ones between conditions.

Only 66 interactions are retained across ≥ 4 conditions.

They are always „on“ and mostly regulate house-keeping functions.

The calculations divide the 5 condition-specific networks into 2 categories:

endogenous and exogenous.

Endogenous processes are multi-stage, operate with an internal transcriptional

program

Exogenous processes are binary events that react to external stimuli with a

rapid turnover of expressed genes.

Page 29: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 29

Figure 2 Newly derived 'follow-on' statistics for network structures. a, TF hub usage in different cellular conditions. The cluster diagram shades cells by the normalized number of genes targeted by TF hubs in each condition. One cluster represents permanent hubs and the others condition-specific transient hubs. Genes are labelled with four-letter names when they have an obvious functional role in the condition, and seven-letter open reading frame names when there is no obvious role. Of the latter, gene names are red and italicised when functions are poorly characterized. Starred hubs show extreme interchange index values, I = 1. b, Interaction interchange (I) of TF between conditions. A histogram of I for all active TFs shows a uni-modal distribution with two extremes. Pie charts show five example TFs with different proportions of interchanged interactions. We list the main functions of the distinct target genes regulated by each example transcription factor. Note how the TFs' regulatory functions change between conditions. c, Overlap in TF usage between conditions. Venn diagrams show the numbers of individual TFs (large intersection) and pair-wise TF combinations (small intersection) that overlap between the two endogenous conditions.

Luscombe et al. Nature 431, 308 (2004)

Page 30: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 30

Luscombe et al. Nature 431, 308 (2004)

Interpretation

Most hubs (78%) are transient = they are influential in one condition, but less

so in others.

Exogenous conditions have fewer transient hubs (different ).

„Transient hub“: capacity to change interactions between connections.

Page 31: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 31

a, The 70 TFs active in the cell cycle. The

diagram shades each cell by the normalized

number of genes targeted by each TF in a

phase. Five clusters represent phase-specific

TFs and one cluster is for ubiquitously active

TFs. Both hub and non-hub TFs are included.

b, Serial inter-regulation between phase-

specific TFs. Network diagrams show TFs

that are active in one phase regulate TFs in

subsequent phases. In the late phases, TFs

apparently regulate those in the next cycle.

c, Parallel inter-regulation between phase-

specific and ubiquitous TFs in a two-tiered

hierarchy. Serial and parallel inter-regulation

operate in tandem to drive the cell cycle while

balancing it with basic house-keeping

processes. Luscombe et al. Nature 431, 308 (2004)

TF inter-regulation during the cell cycle time-course

Page 32: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 32

Luscombe et al. Nature 431, 308 (2004)

Summary

Integrated analysis of transcriptional regulatory information and condition-specific

gene-expression data; post-analysis, e.g. - Identification of permanent and transient hubs- interchange index- overlap in TF usage across multiple conditions.

Large changes in underlying network architecture in response to diverse stimuli, TFs alter their interactions to varying degrees,

thereby rewiring the network some TFs serve as permanent hubs, most act transiently environmental responses facilitate fast signal propagation cell cycle and sporulation proceed via multiple stages

Many of these concepts may also apply to other biological networks.

Page 33: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 33

Luscombe et al. Nature 431, 308 (2004)

additional slides (not used)

Page 34: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 34

Cross-organism comparison

Many TF families are specific to

individual phylogenetic groups or

greatly expanded in some genomes.

Babu et al. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 14, 283 (2004)

In contrast to the high level of conservation of other regulatory and signalling

systems across the crown group eukaryotes,

some of the TF families are dramatically different in the various lineages.

Page 35: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 35

Regulatory interactions across organisms

Are regulatory interactions conserved among organisms? Apparently yes.

Orthologous TFs regulate orthologous target genes.

As expected, the conservation of genes and interaction is related to the

phylogenetic difference between organisms.

Above: Many interactions of (a) can be mapped to pathogenetic Pseudomonas

aeruginosa that is related to E.coli (b).

Very few interactions can be mapped from (a) to (c).

Babu et al. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 14, 283 (2004)

Page 36: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 36

Regulatory interactions across organisms

Observation: there is no bias towards conservation of network motifs.

Regulatory interactions in motifs are lost or retained at the same rate as the other

interactions in the network.

The transcriptional network appears to evolve in a step-wise manner, with loss

and gain of individual interactions probably playing a greater role than loss and

gain of whole motifs or modules.

Observation: TFs are less conserved than target genes, which suggests that

regulation of genes evolves faster than the genes themselves.

Babu et al. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 14, 283 (2004)

Page 37: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 37

Mathematical Aspects of the Inverse Problem

A network with two or more connected components, i.e. two or more sub-networks,

has as fixed configurations the combination (Cartesian product) of all fixed

configurations of each sub-network.

We say that the fixed configurations are factorizable.

Thus, the inverse problem consists of determining whether a fixed configurations

set is factorizable.

In this way, we can obtain some information on the connectivity of the network.

Aracena & Demongeot, Acta Biotheoretica 52, 391 (2004)

Page 38: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 38

Factorization

Given S {0,1}n and a permutation function : {1,...,n} {1,...,n},

we denote by (S), or simply S the set {s(1)s(2) ... s(n) : s1s2...sn S }.

A set S {0,1}n is said to be factorizable if there exist sets of vectors

S1 {0,1}j(1) and S2 {0,1}j(2) and , ..., Sk {0,1}j(3) and a permutation function

: {1, ..., n} {1,...,n} such that S can be written as S = (S1 S2 ... Sk) ,

where the symbol „“ is the cartesian product between sets.

If S is a factorizable set, then j(1) + j(2) + ... + j(k) = n.

The set defined by F = {S1,S2, ...,Sk} is called a factorization of S and each

Sj F a factor of S.

F is called a maximal factorization if every factor Sj F is not factorizable.

Aracena & Demongeot, Acta Biotheoretica 52, 391 (2004)

Page 39: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 39

Examples

i) S = {0100, 0111, 1000, 1011} = {01, 10} {00, 11}.

Here, the permutation function is the identity.

ii) S = {0010, 0111, 1000, 1101} =

({0100, 0111, 1000, 1011})(2,3) = ({01, 10} {00, 11})(2,3) ,

where (2,3) is the function which permutes the second and third coordinates.

Given the sets I {1, ..., n} and S (0,1)n, let PI(S) be the projection set defined by

PI(S) = {(sj(1),sj(2), ...,sj(I)): s S, j(k) I, k = 1, ..., | I |, and j(k) < j(l) for all k < l }.

Aracena & Demongeot, Acta Biotheoretica 52, 391 (2004)

Page 40: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 40

Proposition 2

Proposition 2

If a set S {0,1}n is factorizable, then the maximal factorization of S is unique.

ProofLet F = {S1,S2, ...,Sk} and G = {T1,T2, ...,Tk} be two distinct maximal factorizations of S.

S = (S1 S2 ... Sk)1 = (T1 T2 ... Tk)2

Hence, the permutation = (1)-1 ○ 2 is such that

S1 S2 ... Sk = (T1 T2 ... Tk)

Since F and G are maximal factorizations, there is a factor of F not included into G,

which is supposed to be S1 {0,1}q, q {1, ..., n}.

Aracena & Demongeot, Acta Biotheoretica 52, 391 (2004)

Let T = T1 T2 ... Tm , so S1 = P{1,...,q} (T)

Hence, if we denote by I(k) {1, ..., n} the set of indices such that

PI(k)(T) = T, for every k = 1, ...,m and by J = { j {1,...,m}: I(j) {(1),...,(p)} }

then there exists a permutation function ‘ such that

jsjJ

TPTPS pjsIpjI

,...,1

where',...,1,...,111

Therefore, S1 is factorizable, a contradiction.

Page 41: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 41

Algorithm

Let : {0,1}n {0,1}n P({1,...,n}) be the function called the difference function

where P({1,...,n}) is the set of subsets of {1,...,n} and defined by

(x,y) = {i: xi yi}, where x,y {0,1}n.

Given S {0,1}n, the idea of the Factorization algorithm is first to construct a matrix

with all the values of (x,y) for every x,y S.

Next, for each row i of the matrix we construct a finite and undirected graph

Gi = (Vi,Ei), where the set of nodes Vi is equal to the set {1,...,n} and the set of arcs Ei

is determined by the values of each row of the matrix, according to the algorithm.

Finally, the connected components of the union of all graphs Gi determine the factors

of the maximal factorization of S.

In the case that S is not factorizable, the output of the algorithm will be a graph with a

unique connected component.

Aracena & Demongeot, Acta Biotheoretica 52, 391 (2004)

Page 42: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 42

Algorithm

Aracena & Demongeot, Acta Biotheoretica 52, 391 (2004)

Page 43: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 43

Theorem 3

Given a set S {0,1}n, if I = { I(1), I(2), ..., I(k) } is the output of the Factorization

algorithm with input S,

then F = { P(I)(S): I = 1, ..., k) is the maximal factorization of S

and the complexity of the algorithm is O(|S|3 + n2)

Aracena & Demongeot, Acta Biotheoretica 52, 391 (2004)

Page 44: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 44

Example 2

Let S = { x1 = 000, x2 = 001, x3 = 100, x4 = 010, x5 = 011, x6 = 110}.

The difference matrix is

and the partial graphs and the

output graph of the algorithm are:

Aracena & Demongeot, Acta Biotheoretica 52, 391 (2004)

The output is I(1) = {1,3} and I(2) = {2}.

the maximal factorization of S is given

by

S = (PI(1)(S) PI(2) (S))(2,3)

= ({00,01,10} {0,1})(2,3)

where (2,3) is the permutation of the

second and third coordinates.

Page 45: V10 Transcriptional regulatory networks - introduction

10. Lecture WS 2008/09

Bioinformatics III 45

Example 3

Aracena & Demongeot, Acta Biotheoretica 52, 391 (2004)

The maximal factorization of S is given

by

S = (PI(1)(S) PI(2) (S))(4,5)

= ({0010,0001,1100) (000,111)}(4,5)

The following set of vectors corresponds to the observed fixed points of the A.thaliana

regulatory network, considering only genes whose activity is not constant.

Let S = { x1 = 0010000, x2 = 0011011, x3 = 0000100, x4 = 0001111, x5 = 1100000, x6 = 1101011}.

The difference matrix is

The graph G of the algorithm and the

connected components

I(1) = {1,2,3,5} and I(2) = {4,6,7} are:


Recommended