↓ Skip to main content

A Bayesian Framework That Integrates Heterogeneous Data for Inferring Gene Regulatory Networks

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
A Bayesian Framework That Integrates Heterogeneous Data for Inferring Gene Regulatory Networks
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2014.00013
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tapesh Santra

Abstract

Reconstruction of gene regulatory networks (GRNs) from experimental data is a fundamental challenge in systems biology. A number of computational approaches have been developed to infer GRNs from mRNA expression profiles. However, expression profiles alone are proving to be insufficient for inferring GRN topologies with reasonable accuracy. Recently, it has been shown that integration of external data sources (such as gene and protein sequence information, gene ontology data, protein-protein interactions) with mRNA expression profiles may increase the reliability of the inference process. Here, I propose a new approach that incorporates transcription factor binding sites (TFBS) and physical protein interactions (PPI) among transcription factors (TFs) in a Bayesian variable selection (BVS) algorithm which can infer GRNs from mRNA expression profiles subjected to genetic perturbations. Using real experimental data, I show that the integration of TFBS and PPI data with mRNA expression profiles leads to significantly more accurate networks than those inferred from expression profiles alone. Additionally, the performance of the proposed algorithm is compared with a series of least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression-based network inference methods that can also incorporate prior knowledge in the inference framework. The results of this comparison suggest that BVS can outperform LASSO regression-based method in some circumstances.

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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Korea, Republic of 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Taiwan 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Luxembourg 1 2%
Unknown 51 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 21%
Researcher 11 19%
Student > Master 8 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 9%
Other 5 9%
Other 13 23%
Unknown 3 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 26%
Computer Science 13 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 12%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 8 14%
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 20 May 2014.
All research outputs
#20,230,558
of 22,756,196 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#4,564
of 6,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,791
of 305,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,756,196 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,524 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 305,249 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.