Cited by 31Autophagy in Disease and TherapyFungal and yeast genetics researchBioinformatics and Genomic Networks

Active interaction mapping reveals the hierarchical organization of autophagy

Open access
Kramer, Michael H., Farré, Jean-Claude, Mitra, Koyel, Yu, Michael Ku, Ono, Keiichiro, Demchak, Barry, Licon, Katherine, Flagg, Mitchell +4 more·2017·Molecular Cell

Abstract

We have developed a general progressive procedure, Active Interaction Mapping, to guide assembly of the hierarchy of functions encoding any biological system. Using this process, we assemble an ontology of functions comprising autophagy, a central recycling process implicated in numerous diseases. A first-generation model, built from existing gene networks in Saccharomyces, captures most known autophagy components in broad relation to vesicle transport, cell cycle, and stress response. Systematic analysis identifies synthetic-lethal interactions as most informative for further experiments; consequently, we saturate the model with 156,364 such measurements across autophagy-activating conditions. These targeted interactions provide more information about autophagy than all previous datasets, producing a second-generation ontology of 220 functions. Approximately half are previously unknown; we confirm roles for Gyp1 at the phagophore-assembly site, Atg24 in cargo engulfment, Atg26 in cytoplasm-to-vacuole targeting, and Ssd1, Did4, and others in selective and non-selective autophagy. The procedure and autophagy hierarchy are at http://atgo.ucsd.edu/.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.12.024

Cites

93 of 93 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • One approach to combining multiple network datasets treats them as different features annotated to each edge in a single unified network, with features combined to estimate a single interaction likelihood score for each node pair using supervised machine learning or Bayesian inference.

    “One approach is to treat the multiple datasets as different “features” annotated to each edge in a single unified network; these multiple features are combined to estimate a single interaction likelihood score for each node pair using supervised machine learning (Kramer et al., 2017) or Bayesian inference (Franceschini et al., 2013; Wong et al., 2004).”

    From Mapping the multiscale structure of biological systems (2021) · cites this paper as Kramer et al., 2017

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kramer, M. H., Farré, J.-C., Mitra, K., Yu, M. K., Ono, K., Demchak, B., Licon, K., Flagg, M., Balakrishnan, R., Cherry, J. M., Subramani, S., & Ideker, T.
Affiliations
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Subramani, Suresh
  • Ideker, Trey
Venue
Molecular Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-02
Volume
65
Issue
4
Pages
761-774.e5
ISSN
1097-2765 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2581669044
Cited by
31
References
93
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3
FWCI
4.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular Cell (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (F30-HG007618, P50-GM085764, R01-DK41737, R01-ES014811, R01-GM084279, T32-GM007198, T32-GM008806, U41-HG001315, U41-HG002273)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Autophagy in Disease and Therapy
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Keywords
autophagy, functional hierarchy, synthetic lethality, gene networks, vesicle trafficking, cell cycle, stress response, Ssd1, selective autophagy, Saccharomyces cerevisiae
MeSH terms
Autophagy-Related Proteins, Autophagy, Glucosyltransferases, Humans, Models, Genetic, Pichia, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Gene Expression Regulation, Fungal, Systems Integration, GTPase-Activating Proteins, Genomics, Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins, Databases, Genetic, Systems Biology, Gene Regulatory Networks, Endosomal Sorting Complexes Required for Transport, Protein Interaction Maps

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review