Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Data Structures and Representations
Discussion
References

A Guide to Conquer the Biological Network Era Using Graph Theory

Profile image of Georgios PavlopoulosGeorgios Pavlopoulos

Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology

https://doi.org/10.3389/FBIOE.2020.00034
visibility

…

description

26 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Networks are one of the most common ways to represent biological systems as complex sets of binary interactions or relations between different bioentities. In this article, we discuss the basic graph theory concepts and the various graph types, as well as the available data structures for storing and reading graphs. In addition, we describe several network properties and we highlight some of the widely used network topological features. We briefly mention the network patterns, motifs and models, and we further comment on the types of biological and biomedical networks along with their corresponding computer-and human-readable file formats. Finally, we discuss a variety of algorithms and metrics for network analyses regarding graph drawing, clustering, visualization, link prediction, perturbation, and network alignment as well as the current state-of-the-art tools. We expect this review to reach a very broad spectrum of readers varying from experts to beginners while encouraging them to enhance the field further.

Related papers

Graph-theoretical approaches for studying biological networks
Indulal Gopal
View PDFchevron_right
GraphCrunch 2: Software tool for network modeling, alignment and clustering
Natasa Przulj

2011

Background Recent advancements in experimental biotechnology have produced large amounts of protein-protein interaction (PPI) data. The topology of PPI networks is believed to have a strong link to their function. Hence, the abundance of PPI data for many organisms stimulates the development of computational techniques for the modeling, comparison, alignment, and clustering of networks.

View PDFchevron_right
Medusa: A tool for exploring and clustering biological networks
Jan Aerts

2011

Background Biological processes such as metabolic pathways, gene regulation or protein-protein interactions are often represented as graphs in systems biology. The understanding of such networks, their analysis, and their visualization are today important challenges in life sciences. While a great variety of visualization tools that try to address most of these challenges already exists, only few of them succeed to bridge the gap between visualization and network analysis.

View PDFchevron_right
Fundamentals of Network Biology
IAEES Publications

Zhang WJ. Fundamentals of Network Biology. World Scientific Europe, London, UK, 2018

As the first comprehensive title on network biology, this book covers a wide range of subjects including scientific fundamentals (graphs, networks, etc) of network biology, construction and analysis of biological networks, methods for identifying crucial nodes in biological networks, link prediction, flow analysis, network dynamics, evolution, simulation and control, ecological networks, social networks, molecular and cellular networks, network pharmacology and network toxicology, big data analytics, and more. Across 12 parts and 26 chapters, with Matlab codes provided for most models and algorithms, this self-contained title provides an in-depth and complete insight on network biology. It is a valuable read for high-level undergraduates and postgraduates in the areas of biology, ecology, environmental sciences, medical science, computational science, applied mathematics, and social science. Contents: Mathematical Fundamentals: Fundamentals of Graph Theory Graph Algorithms Fundamentals of Network Theory Other Fundamentals Crucial Nodes/Subnetworks/Modules, Network Types, and Structural Comparison: Identification of Crucial Nodes and Subnetworks/Modules Detection of Network Types Comparison of Network Structure Network Dynamics, Evolution, Simulation and Control: Network Dynamics Network Robustness and Sensitivity Analysis Network Control Network Evolution Cellular Automata Self-Organization Agent-based Modeling Flow Analysis: Flow/Flux Analysis Link and Node Prediction: Link Prediction: Sampling-based Methods Link Prediction: Structure- and Perturbation-based Methods Link Prediction: Node-Similarity-based Methods Node Prediction Network Construction: Construction of Biological Networks Pharmacological and Toxicological Networks: Network Pharmacology and Toxicology Ecological Networks: Food Webs Microscopic Networks: Molecular and Cellular Networks Social Networks: Social Network Analysis Software: Software for Network Analysis Big Data Analytics: Big Data Analytics for Network Biology Readership: Advanced undergraduates and graduate students and researchers in biology, ecology, pharmacology, applied mathematics, computational science, etc.

View PDFchevron_right
Selecting relevant nodes and structures in biological networks. BiNAT: a new plugin for Cytoscape
Fabio Cumbo, Giovanni Felici

F1000Research, 2014

(0) Comments 3 2 1 SOFTWARE TOOL ARTICLE Selecting relevant nodes and structures in biological networks. BiNAT: a new plugin for Cytoscape [v1; ref status: approved 1, approved with reservations 1, not approved 1, Abstract

View PDFchevron_right
Network Biology, 2025, Vol.15, No.1
IAEES Publications

Network Biology, 2025

Network Biology (ISSN 2220-8879; CODEN NBEICS) E-mail: networkbiology@iaees.org Volume 15, Number 1, 1 March 2025 http://www.iaees.org/publications/journals/nb/articles/2025-15(1)/2025-15(1).asp Articles Analysis of amino acid network based on bond energy using graph mining techniques Network Biology, 2025, 15(1): 1-14 Nasrin Irshad Hussain, Kuntala Boruah, Adil Akhtar [Abstract] [XML] [EndNote] [RefManager] [BibTex] [DOAJ] [PubMed] [ Full PDF (208K)] [Email Article] [Comment/Review Article] Application of signed graph in amino acid network Network Biology, 2025, 15(1): 15-23 Adil Akhtar, Nasrin Irshad Hussain [Abstract] [XML] [EndNote] [RefManager] [BibTex] [DOAJ] [PubMed] [ Full PDF (156K)] [Email Article] [Comment/Review Article]

View PDFchevron_right
On Different Aspects of Network Analysis in Systems Biology
Amphun Chaiboonchoe, Antonio Del Sol

Systems Biology, 2013

Network analysis is an essential component of systems biology approaches toward understanding the molecular and cellular interactions underlying biological systems functionalities and their perturbations in disease. Regulatory and signalling pathways involve DNA, RNA, proteins and metabolites as key elements to coordinate most aspects of cellular functioning. Cellular processes depend on the structure and dynamics of gene regulatory networks and can be studied by employing a network representation of molecular interactions. This chapter describes several types of biological networks, how combination of different analytic approaches can be used to study diseases, and provides a list of selected tools for network visualization and analysis. It also introduces proteinprotein interaction networks, gene regulatory networks, signalling networks and metabolic networks to illustrate concepts underlying network representation of cellular processes and molecular interactions. It finally discusses how the level of An erratum to this chapter is available at

View PDFchevron_right
Structural comparison of biological networks based on dominant vertices
Agustino Martínez-antonio, Edgardo Ugalde

Molecular BioSystems, 2013

It is a current practice to organize biological data in a network structure where vertices represent biological components and arrows represent their interactions. A great diversity of graph theoretical notions, such as clustering coefficient, network motifs, centrality, degree distribution, etc., have been developed in order to characterize the structure of these networks. However, none of the existent characterizations allow us to determine global similarity among networks of different sizes. It is the aim of the present paper to introduce a mathematical tool to compare networks not only with regard to their topological structure, but also in their dynamical capabilities. For this reason we aim to propose a pseudo-distance between networks, built around the notions of determination and dominancy, concepts recently introduced in the context of regulatory dynamics on networks. We use our proposed pseudo-distance to compare networks from the following bacteria: E. coli, B. subtilis, P. aeruginosa, M. tuberculosis, S. aureus and C. glutamicum. We also use this pseudo-distance to compare these real bacterial networks with equivalent homogeneous, scale-free and geometric three dimensional random networks. We found that even when bacterial networks are characterized with different levels of detail, have different sizes and represent different aspects of the organisms, the proposed pseudo-distance captures all these characteristics, and indicates how similar they are or not from random networks.

View PDFchevron_right

References (221)

  1. Adai, A. T., Date, S. V., Wieland, S., and Marcotte, E. M. (2004). LGL: creating a map of protein function with an algorithm for visualizing very large biological networks. J. Mol. Biol. 340, 179-190. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2004.04.047
  2. Al-Anzi, B., Arpp, P., Gerges, S., Ormerod, C., Olsman, N., and Zinn, K. (2015). Experimental and computational analysis of a large protein network that controls fat storage reveals the design principles of a signaling network. PLoS Comput. Biol. 11:e1004264. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004264
  3. Alexander, S., and Joydeep, G. (2003). Cluster ensembles-a knowledge reuse framework for combining multiple partitions. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 3, 583-617. doi: 10.1162/153244303321897735
  4. Altschul, S. F., Gish, W., Miller, W., Myers, E. W., and Lipman, D. J. (1990). Basic local alignment search tool. J. Mol. Biol. 215, 403-410. doi: 10.1016/S0022-2836(05)80360-2
  5. Ana, L. N. F., and Jain, A. K. (2003). "Robust data clustering, " in: IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2003
  6. Proceedings (Madison, WI: IEEE Comput. Soc), II-128-II-133. Available online at: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1211462/ (accessed August 21, 2019).
  7. Athanasiadis, E. I., Bourdakou, M. M., and Spyrou, G. M. (2015). Zoomout: analyzing multiple networks as single nodes. IEEE/ACM Trans. Comput. Biol. Bioinform. 12, 1213-1216. doi: 10.1109/TCBB.2015. 2424411
  8. Auber, D., Archambault, D., Bourqui, R., Delest, M., Dubois, J., Lambert, A., et al. (2017). "Tulip 5, " in Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining, eds R. Alhajj and J. Rokne (New York, NY: Springer New York), 1-28.
  9. Azad, A., Pavlopoulos, G. A., Ouzounis, C. A., Kyrpides, N. C., and Buluç, A. (2018). HipMCL: a high-performance parallel implementation of the Markov clustering algorithm for large-scale networks. Nucleic Acids Res. 46:e33. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkx1313
  10. Bader, G. D., Betel, D., and Hogue, C. W. (2003). BIND: the biomolecular interaction network database. Nucleic Acids Res. 31, 248-250. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkg056
  11. Bader, G. D., and Hogue, C. W. (2003). An automated method for finding molecular complexes in large protein interaction networks. BMC Bioinform. 4:2. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-4-2
  12. Barabasi, A.-L., and Albert, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286, 509-512. doi: 10.1126/science.286.5439.509
  13. Barabási, A.-L., and Oltvai, Z. N. (2004). Network biology: understanding the cell's functional organization. Nat. Rev. Genet. 5, 101-113. doi: 10.1038/nrg1272
  14. Barrett, T., Wilhite, S. E., Ledoux, P., Evangelista, C., Kim, I. F., Tomashevsky, M., et al. (2013). NCBI GEO: archive for functional genomics data sets-update. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, D991-D995. doi: 10.1093/nar/gks1193
  15. Bastian, M., Heymann, S., and Jacomy, M. (2009). "Gephi: an open source software for exploring and manipulating networks, " in International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Available online at: http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index. php/ICWSM/09/paper/view/154
  16. Baum, B. R. (1989). PHYLIP: Phylogeny inference package. version 3.2. joel felsenstein. Q. Rev. Biol. 64, 539-41. doi: 10.1086/416571
  17. Bindea, G., Mlecnik, B., Hackl, H., Charoentong, P., Tosolini, M., Kirilovsky, A., et al. (2009). ClueGO: a cytoscape plug-in to decipher functionally grouped gene ontology and pathway annotation networks. Bioinformatics 25, 1091-1093. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp101
  18. Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R., and Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J. Stat. Mech. Theory Exp. 2008:P10008. doi: 10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008
  19. Bollobás, B. (2001). Random Graphs, 2nd Edn. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press, 498. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511814068
  20. Bonacich, P. (1987). Power and centrality: a family of measures. Am. J. Sociol. 92, 1170-1182. doi: 10.1086/228631
  21. Bonnici, V., Caro, G. D., Constantino, G., Liuni, S., D'Elia, D., Bombieri, N., et al. (2018). Arena-Idb: a platform to build human non-coding RNA interaction networks. BMC Bioinform. 19 (Suppl. 10):350. doi: 10.1186/s12859-018-2298-8
  22. Brandes, U., Eiglsperger, M., Lerner, J., and Pich, C. (2017). Graph Markup Language (GraphML). Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis, CRC Press, 517-541.
  23. Breitkreutz, B.-J., Stark, C., and Tyers, M. (2002). Osprey: a network visualization system. Genome Biol. 3:PREPRINT0012. doi: 10.1186/gb-2002-3-12-preprint0012
  24. Brohée, S., Faust, K., Lima-Mendez, G., Sand, O., Janky, R., Vanderstocken, G., et al. (2008). NeAT: a toolbox for the analysis of biological networks, clusters, classes and pathways. Nucleic Acids Res. 36, W444-W451. doi: 10.1093/nar/ gkn336
  25. Brohée, S., and van Helden, J. (2006). Evaluation of clustering algorithms for protein-protein interaction networks. BMC Bioinform. 7:488. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-7-488
  26. Chaouiya, C. (2007). Petri net modelling of biological networks. Brief Bioinform. 8, 210-219. doi: 10.1093/bib/bbm029
  27. Chatr-aryamontri, A., Ceol, A., Palazzi, L. M., Nardelli, G., Schneider, M. V., Castagnoli, L., et al. (2007). MINT: the molecular INTeraction database. Nucleic Acids Res. 35, D572-D574. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkl950
  28. Conant, G. C., and Wagner, A. (2003). Convergent evolution of gene circuits. Nat. Genet. 34, 264-266. doi: 10.1038/ng1181
  29. Croft, D. P., Krause, J., and James, R. (2004). Social networks in the guppy (poecilia reticulata). Proc. Biol. Sci. 271 (Suppl. 6):S516-S519. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2004.0206
  30. Dagum, L., and Menon, R. (1998). Open MP: an industry standard API for shared-memory programming. IEEE Comput. Sci. Eng. 5, 46-55. doi: 10.1109/99.660313
  31. Danon, L., Ford, A. P., House, T., Jewell, C. P., Keeling, M. J., Roberts, G. O., et al. (2011). Networks and the epidemiology of infectious disease. Interdiscip. Perspect Infect. Dis. 2011, 1-28. doi: 10.1155/2011/284909
  32. Darzi, Y., Letunic, I., Bork, P., and Yamada, T. (2018). iPath3.0: interactive pathways explorer v3. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, W510-W513. doi: 10.1093/nar/gky299
  33. Delmas, E., Besson, M., Brice, M.-H., Burkle, L. A., Dalla Riva, G. V., Fortin, M.-J., et al. (2019). Analysing ecological networks of species interactions: analyzing ecological networks. Biol. Rev. 94, 16-36. doi: 10.1111/brv.12433
  34. Demir, E., Cary, M. P., Paley, S., Fukuda, K., Lemer, C., Vastrik, I., et al. (2010). The BioPAX community standard for pathway data sharing. Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 935-942. doi: 10.1038/nbt.1666
  35. Doncheva, N. T., Assenov, Y., Domingues, F. S., and Albrecht, M. (2012). Topological analysis and interactive visualization of biological networks and protein structures. Nat. Protoc. 7, 670-685. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2012.004
  36. Dongen, S. (2000). Performance Criteria for Graph Clustering and Markov Cluster Experiments. National research institute for mathematics and computer science.
  37. Eden, E., Navon, R., Steinfeld, I., Lipson, D., and Yakhini, Z. (2009). GOrilla: a tool for discovery and visualization of enriched GO terms in ranked gene lists. BMC Bioinform. 10:48. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-10-48
  38. Ekre, A. R., and Mante, R. V. (2016). "Genome sequence alignment tools: a review, " in 2016 2nd International Conference on Advances in Electrical, Electronics, Information, Communication and Bio-Informatics (AEEICB) (Chennai: IEEE), 677-681. Available online at: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/lpdocs/epic03/wrapper. htm?arnumber=7538378 (accessed July 18, 2019).
  39. Enright, A. J., Van Dongen, S., and Ouzounis, C. A. (2002). An efficient algorithm for large-scale detection of protein families. Nucleic Acids Res. 30, 1575-1584. doi: 10.1093/nar/30.7.1575
  40. Fabregat, A., Jupe, S., Matthews, L., Sidiropoulos, K., Gillespie, M., Garapati, P., et al. (2018). The reactome pathway knowledgebase. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, D649-D655. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkx1132
  41. Fagny, M., Paulson, J. N., Kuijjer, M. L., Sonawane, A. R., Chen, C.-Y., Lopes- Ramos, C. M., et al. (2017). Exploring regulation in tissues with eQTL networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 114, E7841-E7850. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1707375114
  42. Ferro, A., Giugno, R., Pigola, G., Pulvirenti, A., Skripin, D., Bader, G. D., et al. (2007). NetMatch: a cytoscape plugin for searching biological networks. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 23, 910-912. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm032
  43. Flannick, J., Novak, A., Do, C. B., Srinivasan, B. S., and Batzoglou, S. (2008). "Automatic parameter learning for multiple network alignment, " in Research in Computational Molecular Biology, eds M. Vingron and L. Wong (Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg), 214-231. Available online at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-540-78839-3_19 (accessed December 16, 2019).
  44. Forum, M. P. I. (1994). MPI: A Message-Passing Interface. Oregon Graduate Institute School of Science & Engineering. Report No.: 890839.
  45. Fowlkes, E. B., and Mallows, C. L. (1983). A method for comparing two hierarchical clusterings. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 78, 553-569. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1983.10478008
  46. Franceschini, A., Szklarczyk, D., Frankild, S., Kuhn, M., Simonovic, M., Roth, A., et al. (2013). STRING v9.1: protein-protein interaction networks, with increased coverage and integration. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, D808-D815. doi: 10.1093/nar/gks1094
  47. Franz, M., Lopes, C. T., Huck, G., Dong, Y., Sumer, O., and Bader, G. D. (2016). Cytoscape.js: a graph theory library for visualisation and analysis. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 32, 309-311. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btv557
  48. Franz, M., Rodriguez, H., Lopes, C., Zuberi, K., Montojo, J., Bader, G. D., et al. (2018). GeneMANIA update 2018. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, W60-W64. doi: 10.1093/nar/gky311
  49. Freeman, L. C. (1977). A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry 40, 35-41. doi: 10.2307/3033543
  50. Frey, B. J., and Dueck, D. (2007). Clustering by passing messages between data points. Science 315, 972-976. doi: 10.1126/science.1136800
  51. Fruchterman, T. M. J., and Reingold, E. M. (1991). Graph drawing by force-directed placement. Softw. Pract. Exp. 21, 1129-1164. doi: 10.1002/spe.4380211102
  52. Fung, B. C. M., Wang, K., and Ester, M. (2003). "Hierarchical document clustering using frequent itemsets, " in Proceedings of the 2003 SIAM International Conference on Data Mining (San Francisco, CA: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics), 59-70. Available online at: https://epubs.siam.org/doi/10.1137/1.9781611972733.6 (accessed September 2, 2019).
  53. Gabor, C., and Nepusz, T. (2006). The Igraph Software Package for Complex Network Research. InterJournal;Complex Systems:1695.
  54. Gagescu, R. (2001). The visible cell project. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2, 231-231. doi: 10.1038/35067039
  55. Gagneur, J., Jackson, D. B., and Casari, G. (2003). Hierarchical analysis of dependency in metabolic networks. Bioinformatics 19, 1027-1034. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btg115
  56. Gavin, A.-C., Aloy, P., Grandi, P., Krause, R., Boesche, M., Marzioch, M., et al. (2006). Proteome survey reveals modularity of the yeast cell machinery. Nature 440, 631-636. doi: 10.1038/natur
  57. Gehlenborg, N., O'Donoghue, S. I., Baliga, N. S., Goesmann, A., Hibbs, M. A., Kitano, H., et al. (2010). Visualization of omics data for systems biology. Nat. Methods 7, S56-S68. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.1436
  58. Gene Ontology Consortium (2004). The gene ontology (GO) database and informatics resource. Nucleic Acids Res. 32, 258D-261D. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh036
  59. Gentleman, R. C., Carey, V. J., Bates, D. M., Bolstad, B., Dettling, M., Dudoit, S., et al. (2004). Bioconductor: open software development for computational biology and bioinformatics. Genome Biol. 5:R80. doi: 10.1186/gb-2004-5-10-r80
  60. Gioutlakis, A., Klapa, M. I., and Moschonas, N. K. (2017). PICKLE 2.0: a human protein-protein interaction meta-database employing data integration via genetic information ontology. PLoS ONE 12:e0186039. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186039
  61. Goh, K.-I., Cusick, M. E., Valle, D., Childs, B., Vidal, M., and Barabási, A.-L. (2007). The human disease network. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 8685-8690. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0701361104
  62. Golding, B., and Felsenstein, J. (1990). A maximum likelihood approach to the detection of selection from a phylogeny. J. Mol. Evol. 31, 511-523. doi: 10.1007/BF02102078
  63. Gottlieb, A., Stein, G. Y., Ruppin, E., and Sharan, R. (2011). PREDICT: a method for inferring novel drug indications with application to personalized medicine. Mol. Syst. Biol. 7:496. doi: 10.1038/msb.2011.26
  64. Gu, S., Johnson, J., Faisal, F. E., and Milenković T. (2018). From homogeneous to heterogeneous network alignment via colored graphlets. Sci. Rep. 8:12524. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-30831-w
  65. Guns, R. (2014). "Link prediction, " in Measuring Scholarly Impact, eds Y. Ding, R. Rousseau, and D. Wolfram (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 35-55. Available online at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-10377- 8_2 (accessed December 17, 2019).
  66. Hagberg, A., Schult, D., and Swart, P. (2008). "Exploring network structure, dynamics, and function using network, " in Proceedings of the 7th Python in Science Conference (Pasadena, CA: SciPy), 11-15.
  67. Hage, P., and Harary, F. (1995). Eccentricity and centrality in networks. Soc. Netw. 17, 57-63. doi: 10.1016/0378-8733(94)00248-9
  68. Han, H., Cho, J.-W., Lee, S., Yun, A., Kim, H., Bae, D., et al. (2018). TRRUST v2: an expanded reference database of human and mouse transcriptional regulatory interactions. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, D380-D386. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkx1013
  69. Han, H., Lee, S., and Lee, I. (2019). NGSEA: network-based gene set enrichment analysis for interpreting gene expression phenotypes with functional gene sets. Mol. Cells 42, 579-588. doi: 10.1101/636498
  70. Hermjakob, H., Montecchi-Palazzi, L., Bader, G., Wojcik, J., Salwinski, L., Ceol, A., et al. (2004b). The HUPO PSI's molecular interaction format-a community standard for the representation of protein interaction data. Nat. Biotechnol. 22, 177-183. doi: 10.1038/nbt926
  71. Hermjakob, H., Montecchi-Palazzi, L., Lewington, C., Mudali, S., Kerrien, S., Orchard, S., et al. (2004a). IntAct: an open source molecular interaction database. Nucleic Acids Res. 32, D452-D455. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh052
  72. Himmelstein, D. S., and Baranzini, S. E. (2015). Heterogeneous network edge prediction: a data integration approach to prioritize disease- associated genes. PLoS Comput. Biol. 11:e1004259. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi. 1004259
  73. Holding, A. N., Cook, H. V., and Markowetz, F. (2019). Data generation and network reconstruction strategies for single cell transcriptomic profiles of CRISPR-mediated gene perturbations. Biochim. Biophys. Acta BBA Gene Regul. Mech. 20:194441. doi: 10.1016/j.bbagrm.2019.194441
  74. Hu, Z., Hung, J.-H., Wang, Y., Chang, Y.-C., Huang, C.-L., Huyck, M., et al. (2009). VisANT 3.5: multi-scale network visualization, analysis and inference based on the gene ontology. Nucleic Acids Res. W115-W121. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkp406
  75. Huang, D. W., Sherman, B. T., and Lempicki, R. A. (2009a). Bioinformatics enrichment tools: paths toward the comprehensive functional analysis of large gene lists. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, 1-13. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkn923
  76. Huang, D. W., Sherman, B. T., and Lempicki, R. A. (2009b). Systematic and integrative analysis of large gene lists using DAVID bioinformatics resources. Nat. Protoc. 4, 44-57. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2008.211
  77. Hucka, M., Finney, A., Sauro, H. M., Bolouri, H., Doyle, J. C., Kitano, H., et al. (2003). The systems biology markup language (SBML): a medium for representation and exchange of biochemical network models. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 19, 524-531. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btg015
  78. Hung, J.-H., Yang, T.-H., Hu, Z., Weng, Z., and DeLisi, C. (2012). Gene set enrichment analysis: performance evaluation and usage guidelines. Brief Bioinform. 13, 281-291. doi: 10.1093/bib/bbr049
  79. Huson, D. H., Richter, D. C., Rausch, C., Dezulian, T., Franz, M., and Rupp, R. (2007). Dendroscope: an interactive viewer for large phylogenetic trees. BMC Bioinform. 8:460. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-8-460
  80. Huson, D. H., Rupp, R., and Scornavacca, C. (2010). Phylogenetic Networks: Concepts, Algorithms and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available online at: http://ebooks.cambridge.org/ref/id/ CBO9780511974076 (accessed July 22, 2019).
  81. Ings, T. C., Montoya, J. M., Bascompte, J., Blüthgen, N., Brown, L., Dormann, C. F., et al. (2009). Ecological networks-beyond food webs. J. Anim. Ecol. 78, 253-269. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01460.x
  82. Iragne, F., Nikolski, M., Mathieu, B., Auber, D., and Sherman, D. (2005). ProViz: protein interaction visualization and exploration. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 21, 272-274. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bth494
  83. Ito, T., Shimbo, M., Kudo, T., and Matsumoto, Y. (2005). "Application of kernels to link analysis, " in Proceeding of the Eleventh ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery in Data Mining -KDD'05 (Chicago, IL: ACM Press), 586. Available online at: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid= 1081870.1081941 (accessed December 17, 2019).
  84. Jalili, M., Salehzadeh-Yazdi, A., Gupta, S., Wolkenhauer, O., Yaghmaie, M., Resendis-Antonio, O., et al. (2016). Evolution of centrality measurements for the detection of essential proteins in biological networks. Front. Physiol. 7:375. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2016.00375
  85. Jeong, H., Tombor, B., Albert, R., Oltvai, Z. N., and Barabási, A. L. (2000). The large-scale organization of metabolic networks. Nature 407, 651-654. doi: 10.1038/35036627
  86. Jiang, P., and Singh, M. (2010). SPICi: a fast clustering algorithm for large biological networks. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 26, 1105-1111. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq078
  87. Junker, B. H., and Schreiber, F. (eds) (2008). Analysis of Biological Networks, Wiley Series on Bioinformatics (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience), 346. doi: 10.1002/9780470253489
  88. Kalaev, M., Smoot, M., Ideker, T., and Sharan, R. (2008). NetworkBLAST: comparative analysis of protein networks. Bioinformatics 24, 594-596. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm630
  89. Kandasamy, K., Mohan, S., Raju, R., Keerthikumar, S., Kumar, G. S. S., Venugopal, A. K., et al. (2010). NetPath: a public resource of curated signal transduction pathways. Genome Biol. 11:R3. doi: 10.1186/gb-2010-11-1-r3
  90. Kanehisa, M., and Goto, S. (2000). KEGG: kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 28, 27-30. doi: 10.1093/nar/28.1.27
  91. Kashtan, N., Itzkovitz, S., Milo, R., and Alon, U. (2004). Efficient sampling algorithm for estimating subgraph concentrations and detecting network motifs. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 20, 1746-1758. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bth163
  92. Kavurucu, Y. (2015). A comparative study on network motif discovery algorithms. Int. J. Data Min. Bioinforma.11, 180-204. doi: 10.1504/IJDMB.2015.066777
  93. Kiełbasa, S. M., Wan, R., Sato, K., Horton, P., and Frith, M. C. (2011). Adaptive seeds tame genomic sequence comparison. Genome Res. 21, 487-493. doi: 10.1101/gr.113985.110
  94. Kim, W., Li, M., Wang, J., and Pan, Y. (2011). Biological network motif detection and evaluation. BMC Syst. Biol. 5 (Suppl. 3):S5. doi: 10.1186/1752-0509-5-S3-S5
  95. Kirch, W. (ed) (2008). Pearson's Correlation Coefficient. In: Encyclopedia of Public Health (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), 1090-1. Available online at: http:// link.springer.com/10.1007/978-1-4020-5614-7_2569 (accessed November 12, 2019).
  96. Knuth, D. E. (1997). The Art of Computer Programming, 3rd Edn. Reading: Addison-Wesle.
  97. Köhler, J., Baumbach, J., Taubert, J., Specht, M., Skusa, A., Rüegg, A., et al. (2006). Graph-based analysis and visualization of experimental results with ONDEX. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 22, 1383-1390. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl081
  98. Koschützki, D., and Schreiber, F. (2008). Centrality analysis methods for biological networks and their application to gene regulatory networks. Gene Regul. Syst. Biol. 2, 193-201. doi: 10.4137/GRSB.S702
  99. Koyutürk, M., Kim, Y., Topkara, U., Subramaniam, S., Szpankowski, W., and Grama, A. (2006). Pairwise alignment of protein interaction networks. J. Comput. Biol. 13, 182-199. doi: 10.1089/cmb.2006.13.182
  100. Kramer, F., Bayerlová, M., Klemm, F., Bleckmann, A., and Beissbarth, T. (2013). rBiopaxParser-an R package to parse, modify and visualize BioPAX data. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 29, 520-522. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts710
  101. Krzywinski, M., Birol, I., Jones, S. J., and Marra, M. A. (2012). Hive plots- rational approach to visualizing networks. Brief Bioinform. 13, 627-644. doi: 10.1093/bib/bbr069
  102. Krzywinski, M., Schein, J., Birol, I., Connors, J., Gascoyne, R., Horsman, D., et al. (2009). Circos: an information aesthetic for comparative genomics. Genome Res. 19, 1639-1645. doi: 10.1101/gr.092759.109
  103. Kuchaiev, O., Milenković, T., Memišević, V., Hayes, W., and PrŽulj, N. (2010). Topological network alignment uncovers biological function and phylogeny. J. R. Soc. Interface 7, 1341-1354. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2010.0063
  104. Kumar, S., Stecher, G., and Tamura, K. (2016). MEGA7: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Mol. Biol. Evol. 33, 1870-1874. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msw054
  105. Kunegis, J., Fay, D., and Bauckhage, C. (2013). Spectral evolution in dynamic networks. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 37, 1-36. doi: 10.1007/s10115-012-0575-9
  106. Kutmon, M., van Iersel, M. P., Bohler, A., Kelder, T., Nunes, N., Pico, A. R., et al. (2015). PathVisio 3: an extendable pathway analysis toolbox. PLoS Comput. Biol. 11:e1004085. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi. 1004085
  107. Langfelder, P., Zhang, B., and Horvath, S. (2008). Defining clusters from a hierarchical cluster tree: the dynamic tree cut package for R. Bioinformatics 24, 719-720. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm563
  108. Le Novère, N., Hucka, M., Mi, H., Moodie, S., Schreiber, F., Sorokin, A., et al. (2009). Erratum: the systems biology graphical notation. Nat. Biotechnol. 27, 864-864. doi: 10.1038/nbt0909-864d
  109. Lehne, B., and Schlitt, T. (2009). Protein-protein interaction databases: keeping up with growing interactomes. Hum. Genom. 3, 291-297. doi: 10.1186/1479-7364-3-3-291
  110. Leskovec, J., Backstrom, L., Kumar, R., and Tomkins, A. (2008). "Microscopic evolution of social networks, " in Proceeding of the 14th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining -KDD 08 (Las Vegas, NV: ACM Press), 462. Available online at: http://dl.acm.org/ citation.cfm?doid=1401890.1401948 (accessed December 17, 2019).
  111. Leskovec, J., and Sosič, R. (2016). SNAP: a general-purpose network analysis and graph-mining library. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 8, 1-20. doi: 10.1145/2898361
  112. Letunic, I., and Bork, P. (2007). Interactive tree of life (iTOL): an online tool for phylogenetic tree display and annotation. Bioinformatics 23, 127-128. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl529
  113. Li, T., Ogihara, M., and Ma, S. (2004). "On combining multiple clusterings, " in: Proceedings of the Thirteenth ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management -CIKM'04. (Washington, DC: ACM Press), 294. Available online at: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1031171.1031234 (accessed August 21, 2019).
  114. Lloyd, C. M., Halstead, M. D. B., and Nielsen, P. F. (2004). CellML: its future, present and past. Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol. 85, 433-450. doi: 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2004.01.004
  115. Longabaugh, W. J. R. (2012). BioTapestry: a tool to visualize the dynamic properties of gene regulatory networks. Methods Mol. Biol. 786, 359-394. doi: 10.1007/978-1-61779-292-2_21
  116. Lü, L., Jin, C. H., and Zhou, T. (2009). Similarity index based on local paths for link prediction of complex networks. Phys. Rev. E 80:046122. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.80.046122
  117. Luo, W., and Brouwer, C. (2013). Pathview: an R/Bioconductor package for pathway-based data integration and visualization. Bioinformatics 29, 1830-1831. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btt285
  118. Ma, H.-W., and Zeng, A.-P. (2003). The connectivity structure, giant strong component and centrality of metabolic networks. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 19, 1423-1430. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btg177
  119. Maere, S., Heymans, K., and Kuiper, M. (2005). BiNGO: a cytoscape plugin to assess overrepresentation of gene ontology categories in biological networks. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 21, 3448-3449. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bti551
  120. Mamano, N., and Hayes, W. B. (2017). SANA: simulated annealing far outperforms many other search algorithms for biological network alignment. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 33, 2156-2164. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btx090
  121. Mangan, S., and Alon, U. (2003). Structure and function of the feed- forward loop network motif. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100, 11980-11985. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2133841100
  122. Mangan, S., Zaslaver, A., and Alon, U. (2003). The coherent feedforward loop serves as a sign-sensitive delay element in transcription networks. J. Mol. Biol. 334, 197-204. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2003. 09.049
  123. Marina Meil, ȃ., and David, H. (2001). An experimental comparison of model-based clustering methods. Mach. Learn. 42, 9-29. doi: 10.1023/A:1007648401407
  124. Martin, S., Brown, W. M., Klavans, R., and Boyack, K. W. (2011). OpenOrd: An Open-Source Toolbox for Large Graph Layout. San Francisco: CA. Available from: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/proceeding.aspx?doi= 10.1117/12.871402 (accessed October 25, 2018).
  125. Matys, V., Fricke, E., Geffers, R., Gössling, E., Haubrock, M., Hehl, R., et al. (2003). TRANSFAC: transcriptional regulation, from patterns to profiles. Nucleic Acids Res. 31, 374-378. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkg108
  126. McGillivray, P., Clarke, D., Meyerson, W., Zhang, J., Lee, D., Gu, M., et al. (2018). Network analysis as a grand unifier in biomedical data science. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Data Sci. 1, 153-180. doi: 10.1146/annurev-biodatasci-080917-013444
  127. Meila, M. (2000). Comparing Clustering. University of Washington.
  128. Merico, D., Isserlin, R., Stueker, O., Emili, A., and Bader, G. D. (2010). Enrichment map: a network-based method for gene-set enrichment visualization and interpretation. PLoS ONE 5:e13984. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013984
  129. Mi, H., Muruganujan, A., Casagrande, J. T., and Thomas, P. D. (2013). Large-scale gene function analysis with the PANTHER classification system. Nat. Protoc. 8, 1551-1566. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2013.092
  130. Michael, L. S. A. (2017). DESeq2. Bioconductor. Available online at: https:// bioconductor.org/packages/DESeq2 (accessed December 21, 2019).
  131. Milenković, T., Ng, W. L., Hayes, W., and PrŽUlj, N. (2010). Optimal network alignment with graphlet degree vectors. Cancer Inform. 9:S4744. doi: 10.4137/CIN.S4744
  132. Milner-Gulland, E. J. (2012). Interactions between human behaviour and ecological systems. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 367, 270-278. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0175
  133. Milo, R. (2002). Network motifs: simple building blocks of complex networks. Science 298, 824-827. doi: 10.1126/science.298.5594.824
  134. Mirkin, B. (2001). Eleven ways to look at the chi-squared coefficient for contingency tables. Am. Stat. 55, 111-120. doi: 10.1198/000313001750358428
  135. Mootha, V. K., Lindgren, C. M., Eriksson, K.-F., Subramanian, A., Sihag, S., Lehar, J., et al. (2003). PGC-1alpha-responsive genes involved in oxidative phosphorylation are coordinately downregulated in human diabetes. Nat. Genet. 34, 267-273. doi: 10.1038/ng1180
  136. Moreau, Y., and Tranchevent, L.-C. (2012). Computational tools for prioritizing candidate genes: boosting disease gene discovery. Nat. Rev. Genet. 13, 523-536. doi: 10.1038/nrg3253
  137. Morris, J. H., Apeltsin, L., Newman, A. M., Baumbach, J., Wittkop, T., Su, G., et al. (2011). Clustermaker: a multi-algorithm clustering plugin for cytoscape. BMC Bioinform. 12:436. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-12-436
  138. Moschopoulos, C. N., Pavlopoulos, G. A., Iacucci, E., Aerts, J., Likothanassis, S., Schneider, R., et al. (2011). Which clustering algorithm is better for predicting protein complexes? BMC Res. Notes 4:549. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-4-549
  139. Moulos, P., and Hatzis, P. (2015). Systematic integration of RNA-Seq statistical algorithms for accurate detection of differential gene expression patterns. Nucleic Acids Res. 43:e25. doi: 10.1093/nar/gku1273
  140. Mrvar, A., and Batagelj, V. (2016). Analysis and visualization of large networks with program package Pajek. Comp. Adapt. Syst. Model 4:6. doi: 10.1186/s40294-016-0017-8
  141. Mudunuri, U., Che, A., Yi, M., and Stephens, R. M. (2009). bioDBnet: the biological database network. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 25, 555-556. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn654
  142. Murray-Rust, P., Rzepa, H. S., and Wright, M. (2001). Development of chemical markup language (CML) as a system for handling complex chemical content. N. J. Chem. 618-634. doi: 10.1039/b008780g
  143. Navlakha, S., and Kingsford, C. (2010). The power of protein interaction networks for associating genes with diseases. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 26, 1057-1063. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq076
  144. Needleman, S. B., and Wunsch, C. D. (1970). A general method applicable to the search for similarities in the amino acid sequence of two proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 48, 443-453. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(70)90057-4
  145. Newman, M. E. J., and Girvan, M. (2004). Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Phys. Rev. E 69:026113. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.69.026113
  146. Ni, J., Koyuturk, M., Tong, H., Haines, J., Xu, R., and Zhang, X. (2016). Disease gene prioritization by integrating tissue-specific molecular networks using a robust multi-network model. BMC Bioinform. 17:453. doi: 10.1186/s12859-016-1317-x
  147. Nica, A. C., and Dermitzakis, E. T. (2013). Expression quantitative trait loci: present and future. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 368:20120362. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2012.0362
  148. O'Donoghue, S. I., Gavin, A.-C., Gehlenborg, N., Goodsell, D. S., Hériché J.-K., Nielsen, C. B., et al. (2010). Visualizing biological data-now and in the future. Nat. Methods 7, S2-S4. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.f.301
  149. Pafilis, E., Buttigieg, P. L., Ferrell, B., Pereira, E., Schnetzer, J., Arvanitidis, C., et al. (2016). EXTRACT: interactive extraction of environment metadata and term suggestion for metagenomic sample annotation. Database J. Biol. Databases Curat. 2016:baw005. doi: 10.1093/database/baw005
  150. Parkinson, H., Kapushesky, M., Shojatalab, M., Abeygunawardena, N., Coulson, R., Farne, A., et al. (2007). ArrayExpress-a public database of microarray experiments and gene expression profiles. Nucleic Acids Res. 35, D747-D750. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkl995
  151. Pavlopoulos, G. A., Hooper, S. D., A., Schneider, R., and Aerts, J. (2011b). Medusa: a tool for exploring and clustering biological networks. BMC Res. Notes 4:384. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-4-384
  152. Pavlopoulos, G. A., Iacucci, E., Iliopoulos, I., and Bagos, P. (2013). "Interpreting the omics 'era' data, " in Multimedia Services in Intelligent Environments, eds G. A. Tsihrintzis, M. Virvou, and L. C. Jain (Heidelberg: Springer International Publishing), 79-100. Available online at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978- 3-319-00375-7_6 (accessed January 13, 2019).
  153. Pavlopoulos, G. A., Kontou, P. I., Pavlopoulou, A., Bouyioukos, C., Markou, E., and Bagos, P. G. (2018). Bipartite graphs in systems biology and medicine: a survey of methods and applications. GigaScience 7, 1-31. doi: 10.1093/gigascience/giy014
  154. Pavlopoulos, G. A., Malliarakis, D., Papanikolaou, N., Theodosiou, T., Enright, A. J., and Iliopoulos, I. (2015). Visualizing genome and systems biology: technologies, tools, implementation techniques and trends, past, present and future. GigaScience 4:38. doi: 10.1186/s13742-015-0077-2
  155. Pavlopoulos, G. A., O'Donoghue, S. I., Satagopam, V. P., Soldatos, T. G., Pafilis, E., and Schneider, R. (2008b). Arena3D: visualization of biological networks in 3D. BMC Syst. Biol. 2:104. doi: 10.1186/1752-0509-2-104
  156. Pavlopoulos, G. A., Paez-Espino, D., Kyrpides, N. C., and Iliopoulos, I. (2017). Empirical comparison of visualization tools for larger-scale network analysis. Adv. Bioinforma. 2017:1278932. doi: 10.1155/2017/1278932
  157. Pavlopoulos, G. A., Promponas, V. J., Ouzounis, C. A., and Iliopoulos, I. (2014). Biological information extraction and co-occurrence analysis. Methods Mol. Biol. 1159, 77-92. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-0709-0_5
  158. Pavlopoulos, G. A., Secrier, M., Moschopoulos, C. N., Soldatos, T. G., Kossida, S., Aerts, J., et al. (2011a). Using graph theory to analyze biological networks. BioData Min. 4:10. doi: 10.1186/1756-0381-4-10
  159. Pavlopoulos, G. A., Soldatos, T. G., Barbosa-Silva, A., and Schneider, R. (2010). A reference guide for tree analysis and visualization. BioData Min. 3:1. doi: 10.1186/1756-0381-3-1
  160. Pavlopoulos, G. A., Wegener, A.-L., and Schneider, R. (2008a). A survey of visualization tools for biological network analysis. BioData Min. 1:12. doi: 10.1186/1756-0381-1-12
  161. Pearson, W. R. (2000). Flexible sequence similarity searching with the FASTA3 program package. Methods Mol. Biol. 132, 185-219. doi: 10.1385/1-59259-192-2:185
  162. Peixoto, T. P. (2017). The Graph-Tool Python Library. Figshare. Available from: https://figshare.com/articles/graph_tool/1164194 (accessed December 19, 2019).
  163. Peri, S., Navarro, J. D., Amanchy, R., Kristiansen, T. Z., Jonnalagadda, C. K., Surendranath, V., et al. (2003). Development of human protein reference database as an initial platform for approaching systems biology in humans. Genome Res. 13, 2363-2371. doi: 10.1101/gr.1680803
  164. Pillich, R. T., Chen, J., Rynkov, V., Welker, D., and Pratt, D. (2017). NDEx: a community resource for sharing and publishing of biological networks. Methods Mol. Biol. 1558, 271-301. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-6783-4_13
  165. Platig, J., Castaldi, P. J., DeMeo, D., and Quackenbush, J. (2016). Bipartite community structure of eQTLs. PLoS Comput Biol. 12:e1005033. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005033
  166. Przulj, N., Corneil, D. G., and Jurisica, I. (2004). Modeling interactome: scale-free or geometric? Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 20, 3508-3515. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bth436
  167. Rand, W. M. (1971). Objective Criteria for the evaluation of clustering methods. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 66, 846-850. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1971.10482356
  168. Rao, V. S., Srinivas, K., Sujini, G. N., and Kumar, G. N. S. (2014)Protein-protein interaction detection: methods and analysis. Int. J. Proteomics 2014:1-12. doi: 10.1155/2014/147648
  169. Raudvere, U., Kolberg, L., Kuzmin, I., Arak, T., Adler, P., Peterson, H., et al. (2019). g:Profiler: a web server for functional enrichment analysis and conversions of gene lists (2019 update). Nucleic Acids Res. 47, W191-W198. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkz369
  170. Reimand, J., Isserlin, R., Voisin, V., Kucera, M., Tannus-Lopes, C., Rostamianfar, A., et al. (2019). Pathway enrichment analysis and visualization of omics data using g:Profiler, GSEA, cytoscape and enrichmentmap. Nat. Protoc. 14, 482-517. doi: 10.1038/s41596-018-0103-9
  171. Reisig, W. (1985). Petri Nets: An Introduction. Berlin, NY: Springer- Verlag. 161 (EATCS monographs on theoretical computer science). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-69968-9
  172. Rodchenkov, I., Babur, O., Luna, A., Aksoy, B. A., Wong, J. V., Fong, D., et al. (2019). Pathway commons 2019 update: integration, analysis and exploration of pathway data. Nucleic Acids Res. 48, D489-D497. doi: 10.1093/nar/ gkz946
  173. Romanuk, T. N., Vogt, R. J., Young, A., Tuck, C., and Carscallen, M. W. (2010). Maintenance of positive diversity-stability relations along a gradient of environmental stress. PLoS ONE 5:e10378. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0010378
  174. Sabidussi, G. (1966). The centrality of a graph. Psychometrika 31, 581-603. doi: 10.1007/BF02289527
  175. Saito, R., Smoot, M. E., Ono, K., Ruscheinski, J., Wang, P.-L., Lotia, S., et al. (2012). A travel guide to cytoscape plugins. Nat. Methods 9, 1069-1076. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.2212
  176. Saitou, N., and Nei, M. (1987). The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 4, 406-425.
  177. Santolini, M., and Barabási, A.-L. (2018). Predicting perturbation patterns from the topology of biological networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 115, E6375-E6383. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1720589115
  178. Satagopam, V. P., Theodoropoulou, M. C., Stampolakis, C. K., Pavlopoulos, G. A., Papandreou, N. C., Bagos, P. G., et al. (2010). GPCRs, G-proteins, effectors and their interactions: human-gpDB, a database employing visualization tools and data integration techniques. Database J. Biol. Databases Curat. 2010:baq019. doi: 10.1093/database/baq019
  179. Schreiber, F., and Schwöbbermeyer, H. (2005). MAVisto: a tool for the exploration of network motifs. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 21, 3572-3574. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bti556
  180. Secrier, M., Pavlopoulos, G. A., Aerts, J., and Schneider, R. (2012). Arena3D: visualizing time-driven phenotypic differences in biological systems. BMC Bioinform. 13:45. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-13-45
  181. Shannon, P., Markiel, A., Ozier, O., Baliga, N. S., Wang, J. T., Ramage, D., et al. (2003). Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks. Genome Res. 13, 2498-2504. doi: 10.1101/gr.1239303
  182. Sharan, R., Suthram, S., Kelley, R. M., Kuhn, T., McCuine, S., Uetz, P., et al. (2005). Conserved patterns of protein interaction in multiple species. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102, 1974-1979. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0409522102
  183. Sharan, R., Ulitsky, I., and Shamir, R. (2007). Network-based prediction of protein function. Mol. Syst. Biol. 3:88. doi: 10.1038/msb4100129
  184. Shen-Orr, S. S., Milo, R., Mangan, S., and Alon, U. (2002). Network motifs in the transcriptional regulation network of Escherichia coli. Nat. Genet. 31, 64-68. doi: 10.1038/ng881
  185. Siebourg-Polster, J., Mudrak, D., Emmenlauer, M., Rämö. P., Dehio, C., Greber, U., et al. (2015). NEMix: single-cell nested effects models for probabilistic pathway stimulation. PLoS Comput. Biol. 11:e1004078. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004078
  186. Slenter, D. N., Kutmon, M., Hanspers, K., Riutta, A., Windsor, J., Nunes, N., et al. (2018). WikiPathways: a multifaceted pathway database bridging metabolomics to other omics research. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, D661-D667. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkx1064
  187. Smith, T. F., and Waterman, M. S. (1981). Identification of common molecular subsequences. J. Mol. Biol. 147, 195-197. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(81)90087-5
  188. Smola, A. J., and Kondor, R. (2003). "Kernels and regularization on graphs, " in Learning Theory and Kernel Machines, eds B. Schölkopf and M. K. Warmuth (Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg), 144-158. Available online at: http://link. springer.com/10.1007/978-3-540-45167-9_12 (accessed December 17, 2019).
  189. Sommer, B. (2019). The CELLmicrocosmos tools: a small history of java-based cell and membrane modelling open source software development. J. Integr. Bioinform. 16:20190057. doi: 10.1515/jib-2019-0057
  190. Sonawane, A. R., Weiss, S. T., Glass, K., and Sharma, A. (2019). Network medicine in the age of biomedical big data. Front. Genet. 10:294. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2019.00294
  191. Spirin, V., and Mirny, L. A. (2003). Protein complexes and functional modules in molecular networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100, 12123-12128. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2032324100
  192. Stark, C., Breitkreutz, B.-J., Reguly, T., Boucher, L., Breitkreutz, A., and Tyers, M. (2006). BioGRID: a general repository for interaction datasets. Nucleic Acids Res. 34, D535-D539. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkj109
  193. Stone, L., Simberloff, D., and Artzy-Randrup, Y. (2019). Network motifs and their origins. PLoS Comput. Biol. 15:e1006749. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006749
  194. Subramanian, A., Tamayo, P., Mootha, K., Mukherjee, S., Ebert, B. L., Gillette, M. A., et al. (2005). Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102, 15545-15550. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0506580102
  195. Szklarczyk, D., and Jensen, L. J. (2015). "Protein-protein interaction databases, " in Protein-Protein Interactions, eds C. L. Meyerkord and H. Fu (New York, NY: Springer New York), 39-56.
  196. Szklarczyk, D., Santos, A., von Mering, C., Jensen, L. J., Bork, P., and Kuhn, M. (2016). STITCH 5: augmenting protein-chemical interaction networks with tissue and affinity data. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, D380-D384. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkv1277
  197. Theocharidis, A., van Dongen, S., Enright, A. J., and Freeman, T. C. (2009). Network visualization and analysis of gene expression data using biolayout express(3D). Nat. Protoc. 4, 1535-1550. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2009.177
  198. Theodosiou, T., Efstathiou, G., Papanikolaou, N., Kyrpides, N. C., Bagos, P. G., Iliopoulos, I., et al. (2017). NAP: The network analysis profiler, a web tool for easier topological analysis and comparison of medium-scale biological networks. BMC Res. Notes 10:278. doi: 10.1186/s13104-017-2607-8
  199. Thimm, O., Bläsing, O., Gibon, Y., Nagel, A., Meyer, S., Krüger, P., et al. (2004). MAPMAN: a user-driven tool to display genomics data sets onto diagrams of metabolic pathways and other biological processes. Plant J. Cell Mol. Biol. 37, 914-939. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2004.02016.x
  200. Thomas, R., and Portier, C. J. (2013). Gene expression networks. Methods Mol. Biol. 930, 165-178. doi: 10.1007/978-1-62703-059-5_7
  201. Tian, W., and Samatova, N. F. (2008). "Pairwise alignment of interaction networks by fast identification of maximal conserved patterns, " in Biocomputing 2009 (Kohala Coast, HI: World Scientific), 99-110. Available online at: http:// www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789812836939_0010 (accessed December 16, 2019).
  202. Tipney, H., and Hunter, L. (2010). An introduction to effective use of enrichment analysis software. Hum. Genomics 4, 202-206. doi: 10.1186/1479-7364-4-3-202
  203. Torres, J. M., Gamazon, E. R., Parra, E. J., Below, J. E., Valladares-Salgado, A., Wacher, N., et al. (2014). Cross-tissue and tissue-specific eQTLs: partitioning the heritability of a complex trait. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 95, 521-534. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.10.001
  204. Towfic, F., Greenlee, M. H. W., and Honavar, V. (2009). "Aligning biomolecular networks using modular graph kernels, " in Algorithms in Bioinformatics, eds S. L. Salzberg and T. Warnow (Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg), 345-361. Available online at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-642-04241-6_29 (accessed December 11, 2019).
  205. Tripathi, K. P., Evangelista, D., Zuccaro, A., and Guarracino, M. R. (2015). Transcriptator: an automated computational pipeline to annotate assembled reads and identify non coding RNA. PLoS ONE 10:e0140268. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140268
  206. Ulgen, E., Ozisik, O., and Sezerman, O. U. (2019). pathfindR: An R package for comprehensive identification of enriched pathways in omics data through active subnetworks. Front. Genet. 10:858. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2019.
  207. Ulrich, L. E., and Zhulin, I. B. (2007). MiST: a microbial signal transduction database. Nucleic Acids Res. 35, D386-D390. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkl932
  208. Vázquez, A., Dobrin, R., Sergi, D., Eckmann, J.-P., Oltvai, Z. N., and Barabási, A.- L. (2004). The topological relationship between the large-scale attributes and local interaction patterns of complex networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101, 17940-17945. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0406024101
  209. Wagner, S., and Wagner, D. (2007). Comparing Clusterings -An Overview. Karlsruhe. Available online at: https://publikationen.bibliothek.kit.edu/ 1000011477 (accessed July 24, 2019).
  210. Watts, D. J., and Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of "small-world" networks. Nature 393, 440-442. doi: 10.1038/30918
  211. Wernicke, S., and Rasche, F. (2006). FANMOD: a tool for fast network motif detection. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 22, 1152-1153. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl038
  212. Xenarios, I., Rice, D. W., Salwinski, L., Baron, M. K., Marcotte, E. M., and Eisenberg, D. (2000). DIP: the database of interacting proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 28, 289-291. doi: 10.1093/nar/28.1.289
  213. Xu, R., and Wunsch,II. D. (2005). Survey of clustering algorithms. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 16, 645-678. doi: 10.1109/TNN.2005.845141
  214. Yang, Z. (1996). Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony and likelihood methods. J. Mol. Evol. 42, 294-307. doi: 10.1007/BF02198856
  215. Yevshin, I., Sharipov, R., Kolmykov, S., Kondrakhin, Y., and Kolpakov, F. (2019). GTRD: a database on gene transcription regulation-2019 update. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, D100-D105. doi: 10.1093/nar/gky1128
  216. Yifan, H. (2005). Efficient, high-quality force-directed graph drawing. Math. J. 10, 37-71. Available online at: http://asus.myds.me:6543/paper/ktall/37%20- %201984%20-%20Efficient,%20High-Quality%20Force-Directed%20Graph %20Drawing.pdf
  217. Yook, S.-H., Oltvai, Z. N., and Barabási, A.-L. (2004). Functional and topological characterization of protein interaction networks. Proteomics 4, 928-942. doi: 10.1002/pmic.200300636
  218. Yue, X., Wang, Z., Huang, J., Parthasarathy, S., Moosavinasab, S., Huang, Y., et al. (2019). Graph embedding on biomedical networks: methods, applications and evaluations. Cowen L Ed. Bioinform. btz718. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz718
  219. Zampelli, S., Deville, Y., and Solnon, C. (2010). Solving subgraph isomorphism problems with constraint programming. Constraints 15, 327-353. doi: 10.1007/s10601-009-9074-3
  220. Zhang, H., Liang, Y., Han, S., Peng, C., and Li, Y. (2019). Long noncoding RNA and protein interactions: from experimental results to computational models based on network methods. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 20:1284. doi: 10.3390/ijms200 61284
  221. Zhou, C. (2016). A Survey of Edge Bundling Methods for Graph Visualization. Zhou, H., Panpan, X.u, Yuan, X., and Qu, H. (2013). Edge bundling in information visualization. Tsinghua. Sci. Technol. 18, 145-156. doi: 10.1109/TST.2013.6509098

Related papers

Network Analysis Tools: from biological networks to clusters and pathways
Karoline Faust

Nature protocols, 2008

View PDFchevron_right
NAP: The Network Analysis Profiler, a web tool for easier topological analysis and comparison of medium-scale biological networks
Theodosios Theodosiou

BMC Research Notes

Objective: Nowadays, due to the technological advances of high-throughput techniques, Systems Biology has seen a tremendous growth of data generation. With network analysis, looking at biological systems at a higher level in order to better understand a system, its topology and the relationships between its components is of a great importance. Gene expression, signal transduction, protein/chemical interactions, biomedical literature co-occurrences, are few of the examples captured in biological network representations where nodes represent certain bioentities and edges represent the connections between them. Today, many tools for network visualization and analysis are available. Nevertheless, most of them are standalone applications that often (i) burden users with computing and calculation time depending on the network's size and (ii) focus on handling, editing and exploring a network interactively. While such functionality is of great importance, limited efforts have been made towards the comparison of the topological analysis of multiple networks. Results: Network Analysis Provider (NAP) is a comprehensive web tool to automate network profiling and intra/internetwork topology comparison. It is designed to bridge the gap between network analysis, statistics, graph theory and partially visualization in a user-friendly way. It is freely available and aims to become a very appealing tool for the broader community. It hosts a great plethora of topological analysis methods such as node and edge rankings. Few of its powerful characteristics are: its ability to enable easy profile comparisons across multiple networks, find their intersection and provide users with simplified, high quality plots of any of the offered topological characteristics against any other within the same network. It is written in R and Shiny, it is based on the igraph library and it is able to handle medium-scale weighted/unweighted, directed/undirected and bipartite graphs. NAP is available at http:// bioinformatics.med.uoc.gr/NAP.

View PDFchevron_right
Development of an integrated network visualisation and graph analysis tool for biological networks
Sachin Shetty

International Journal of Computational Biology and Drug Design, 2012

David Carbonetta DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTEGRATED NETWORK VISUALIZATION AND GRAPH ANALYSIS TOOL FOR BIOLOGICAL NETWORKS 2014 Ying Tang, Ph.D. There has been steady increase in the amount of molecular data generated by experiments and computational methods performed on biological networks. There is a growing need to obtain an insight into the organization and structure of the massive and complex biological networks formed by the interacting molecules. To that end, this work presents the development of an integrated network visualization and graph analysis plugin within the Cytoscape framework. The plugin is capable of computing and visualizing a comprehensive set of dyad, node, and graph level statistics. The evaluation of the plugin on a range of biological networks and its memory performance is conducted. The plugin, proven to be scalable, is an interactive and highly customizable application that expects no prior knowledge in graph theory from the user.

View PDFchevron_right
Graph Theory and Networks in Biology
Indulal Gopal

In this paper, we present a survey of the use of graph theoretical techniques in Biology. In particular, we discuss recent work on identifying and modelling the structure of bio-molecular networks, as well as the application of centrality measures to interaction networks and research on the hierarchical structure of such networks and network motifs. Work on the link between structural network properties and dynamics is also described, with emphasis on synchronization and disease propagation.

View PDFchevron_right
Using graph theory to analyze biological networks
Maria Secrier, Reinhard Schneider

BioData mining, 2011

Understanding complex systems often requires a bottom-up analysis towards a systems biology approach. The need to investigate a system, not only as individual components but as a whole, emerges. This can be done by examining the elementary constituents individually and then how these are connected. The myriad components of a system and their interactions are best characterized as networks and they are mainly represented as graphs where thousands of nodes are connected with thousands of vertices. In this article we demonstrate approaches, models and methods from the graph theory universe and we discuss ways in which they can be used to reveal hidden properties and features of a network. This network profiling combined with knowledge extraction will help us to better understand the biological significance of the system.

View PDFchevron_right

Cited by

Application of Bipartite Networks to the Study of Water Quality
Jesús Muñoz-Rojas

Sustainability

Water is a basic natural resource for life and the sustainable development of society. Methods to assess water quality in freshwater ecosystems based on environmental quality bioindicators have proven to be low cost, reliable, and can be adapted to ecosystems with well-defined structures. The objective of this paper is to propose an interdisciplinary approach for the assessment of water quality in freshwater ecosystems through bioindicators. From the presence/absence of bioindicator organisms and their sensitivity/tolerance to environmental stress, we constructed a bipartite network, G. In this direction, we propose a new method that combines two research approaches, Graph Theory and Random Matrix Theory (RMT). Through the topological properties of the graph G, we introduce a topological index, called J P ( G ) , to evaluate the water quality, and we study its properties and relationships with known indices, such as Biological Monitoring Working Party ( B M W P ) and Shannon diversi...

View PDFchevron_right
Arena3Dweb: Interactive 3D visualization of multilayered networks
Fotis Baltoumas

ABSTRACTEfficient integration and visualization of heterogeneous biomedical information in a single view is a key challenge. In this study, we present Arena3Dweb, the first, fully interactive and dependency-free, web application which allows the visualization of multilayered graphs in 3D space. With Arena3Dweb, users can integrate multiple networks in a single view along with their intra- and inter-layer connections. For clearer and more informative views, users can choose between a plethora of layout algorithms and apply them on a set of selected layers either individually or in combination. Users can align networks and highlight node topological features, whereas each layer as well as the whole scene can be translated, rotated and scaled in 3D space. User-selected edge colors can be used to highlight important paths, while node positioning, coloring and resizing can be adjusted on-the-fly. In its current version, Arena3Dweb supports weighted and unweighted undirected graphs and is...

View PDFchevron_right
FLAME: A Web Tool for Functional and Literature Enrichment Analysis of Multiple Gene Lists
Fotis Baltoumas

Biology

Functional enrichment is a widely used method for interpreting experimental results by identifying classes of proteins/genes associated with certain biological functions, pathways, diseases, or phenotypes. Despite the variety of existing tools, most of them can process a single list per time, thus making a more combinatorial analysis more complicated and prone to errors. In this article, we present FLAME, a web tool for combining multiple lists prior to enrichment analysis. Users can upload several lists and use interactive UpSet plots, as an alternative to Venn diagrams, to handle unions or intersections among the given input files. Functional and literature enrichment, along with gene conversions, are offered by g:Profiler and aGOtool applications for 197 organisms. FLAME can analyze genes/proteins for related articles, Gene Ontologies, pathways, annotations, regulatory motifs, domains, diseases, and phenotypes, and can also generate protein–protein interactions derived from STRIN...

View PDFchevron_right
VICTOR: A visual analytics web application for comparing cluster sets
Fotis Baltoumas

Computers in Biology and Medicine

Clustering is the process of grouping together different data objects based on similar properties. Clustering has applications in various case studies from several fields such as graph theory, image analysis, pattern recognition, statistics and others. Nowadays, there are numerous algorithms and tools able to generate clustering results. However, different algorithms or parameterization may result in very different clusters. This way, the user is often forced to manually filter and compare these results in order to decide which of them produce the ideal clusters. To automate this process, in this study, we present VICTOR, the first fully interactive and dependency-free visual analytics web application which allows the comparison and visualization of various clustering algorithms. VICTOR can handle multiple clustering results simultaneously and compare them using ten different metrics. Clustering results can be filtered and compared to each other with the use of interactive heatmaps, bar plots, correlation networks, sankey and circos plots. We demonstrate VICTOR's functionality using three examples. In the first case, we compare five different algorithms on a protein-protein interaction dataset whereas in the second example, we test four different parameters of the same clustering algorithm applied on the same dataset. Finally, as a third example, we compare four different meta-analyses with hierarchically clustered differentially expressed genes found to be involved in myocardial infarction.

View PDFchevron_right
An Analysis of Eccentricity-Based Invariants for Biochemical Hypernetworks
Shazia Manzoor, Mlamuli Dhlamini

2021

Biological proceedings are well characterized by solid illustrations for communication networks. The framework of biological networks has to be considered together with the expansion of infectious diseases like coronavirus. Also, the graph entropies have established themselves as the information theoretic measure to evaluate the architectural information of biological networks. In this article, we examined conclusive biochemical networks like t -level hypertrees along with the corona product of hypertrees with path. We computed eccentricity-based indices for the depiction of aforementioned theoretical frameworks of biochemical networks. Furthermore, explicit depiction of the graph entropies with these indices is also measured.

View PDFchevron_right
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved