↓ Skip to main content

Measuring the Evolutionary Rewiring of Biological Networks

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
359 Mendeley
citeulike
43 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Measuring the Evolutionary Rewiring of Biological Networks
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, January 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1001050
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chong Shou, Nitin Bhardwaj, Hugo Y. K. Lam, Koon-Kiu Yan, Philip M. Kim, Michael Snyder, Mark B. Gerstein

Abstract

We have accumulated a large amount of biological network data and expect even more to come. Soon, we anticipate being able to compare many different biological networks as we commonly do for molecular sequences. It has long been believed that many of these networks change, or "rewire", at different rates. It is therefore important to develop a framework to quantify the differences between networks in a unified fashion. We developed such a formalism based on analogy to simple models of sequence evolution, and used it to conduct a systematic study of network rewiring on all the currently available biological networks. We found that, similar to sequences, biological networks show a decreased rate of change at large time divergences, because of saturation in potential substitutions. However, different types of biological networks consistently rewire at different rates. Using comparative genomics and proteomics data, we found a consistent ordering of the rewiring rates: transcription regulatory, phosphorylation regulatory, genetic interaction, miRNA regulatory, protein interaction, and metabolic pathway network, from fast to slow. This ordering was found in all comparisons we did of matched networks between organisms. To gain further intuition on network rewiring, we compared our observed rewirings with those obtained from simulation. We also investigated how readily our formalism could be mapped to other network contexts; in particular, we showed how it could be applied to analyze changes in a range of "commonplace" networks such as family trees, co-authorships and linux-kernel function dependencies.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 359 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 18 5%
United Kingdom 7 2%
Germany 5 1%
Brazil 4 1%
Mexico 4 1%
Switzerland 3 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Belgium 2 <1%
Other 17 5%
Unknown 295 82%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 111 31%
Researcher 94 26%
Student > Master 36 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 26 7%
Professor 18 5%
Other 52 14%
Unknown 22 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 221 62%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 38 11%
Computer Science 21 6%
Physics and Astronomy 13 4%
Engineering 8 2%
Other 29 8%
Unknown 29 8%
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 05 July 2012.
All research outputs
#17,433,619
of 25,576,801 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#7,517
of 9,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,037
of 191,886 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#38
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,801 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 191,886 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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.