arXiv · 0905.0991
Comparative analysis of module-based versus direct methods for reverse-engineering transcriptional regulatory networks
Abstract
We have compared a recently developed module-based algorithm LeMoNe for reverse-engineering transcriptional regulatory networks to a mutual information based direct algorithm CLR, using benchmark expression data and databases of known transcriptional regulatory interactions for Escherichia coli and Saccharomyces cerevisiae. A global comparison using recall versus precision curves hides the topologically distinct nature of the inferred networks and is not informative about the specific subtasks for which each method is most suited. Analysis of the degree distributions and a regulator specific comparison show that CLR is 'regulator-centric', making true predictions for a higher number of regulators, while LeMoNe is 'target-centric', recovering a higher number of known targets for fewer regulators, with limited overlap in the predicted interactions between both methods. Detailed biological examples in E. coli and S. cerevisiae are used to illustrate these differences and to prove that each method is able to infer parts of the network where the other fails. Biological validation of the inferred networks cautions against over-interpreting recall and precision values computed using incomplete reference networks.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Tom Michoel, Riet De Smet, Anagha Joshi, Yves Van de Peer, Kathleen Marchal. 2009-05-07. Comparative analysis of module-based versus direct methods for reverse-engineering transcriptional regulatory networks. https://arxiv.org/abs/0905.0991
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.