↓ Skip to main content

Effect of Reference Genome Selection on the Performance of Computational Methods for Genome-Wide Protein-Protein Interaction Prediction

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Effect of Reference Genome Selection on the Performance of Computational Methods for Genome-Wide Protein-Protein Interaction Prediction
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0042057
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vijaykumar Yogesh Muley, Akash Ranjan

Abstract

Recent progress in computational methods for predicting physical and functional protein-protein interactions has provided new insights into the complexity of biological processes. Most of these methods assume that functionally interacting proteins are likely to have a shared evolutionary history. This history can be traced out for the protein pairs of a query genome by correlating different evolutionary aspects of their homologs in multiple genomes known as the reference genomes. These methods include phylogenetic profiling, gene neighborhood and co-occurrence of the orthologous protein coding genes in the same cluster or operon. These are collectively known as genomic context methods. On the other hand a method called mirrortree is based on the similarity of phylogenetic trees between two interacting proteins. Comprehensive performance analyses of these methods have been frequently reported in literature. However, very few studies provide insight into the effect of reference genome selection on detection of meaningful protein interactions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 39 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 33%
Researcher 8 19%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Professor 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 7 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 45%
Computer Science 7 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 7 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 17 August 2012.
All research outputs
#7,172,306
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#84,741
of 193,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,283
of 164,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,562
of 3,986 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
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 164,574 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,986 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.