The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Development of a Chemical Structure Comparison Method for Integrated Analysis of Chemical and Genomic Information in the Metabolic Pathways
Abstract
Cellular functions result from intricate networks of molecular interactions, which involve not only proteins and nucleic acids but also small chemical compounds. Here we present an efficient algorithm for comparing two chemical structures of compounds, where the chemical structure is treated as a graph consisting of atoms as nodes and covalent bonds as edges. On the basis of the concept of functional groups, 68 atom types (node types) are defined for carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, and other atomic species with different environments, which has enabled detection of biochemically meaningful features. Maximal common subgraphs of two graphs can be found by searching for maximal cliques in the association graph, and we have introduced heuristics to accelerate the clique finding and to detect optimal local matches (simply connected common subgraphs). Our procedure was applied to the comparison and clustering of 9383 compounds, mostly metabolic compounds, in the KEGG/LIGAND database. The largest clusters of similar compounds were related to carbohydrates, and the clusters corresponded well to the categorization of pathways as represented by the KEGG pathway map numbers. When each pathway map was examined in more detail, finer clusters could be identified corresponding to subpathways or pathway modules containing continuous sets of reaction steps. Furthermore, it was found that the pathway modules identified by similar compound structures sometimes overlap with the pathway modules identified by genomic contexts, namely, by operon structures of enzyme genes.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology
Ashburner, M., Ball, C. A., Blake, J. A., Botstein, D., Butler, H., Cherry, J. M., Davis, A. P., Dolinski, K., Dwight, S. S., Eppig, J. T., et al. (2000) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/75556 · Cited by 43,206
Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks
Barabási, A.-L., & Albert, R. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.286.5439.509 · Cited by 36,135
The complete genome sequence of the gram-positive bacterium Bacillus subtilis.
Kunst, F., Ogasawara, N., Moszer, I., Albertini, A. M., Alloni, G., Azevedo, V., Bertero, M. G., Bessières, P., Bolotin, A., Borchert, S., et al. (1997) · Nature · doi:10.1038/36786 · Cited by 3,679
Cited by
Gaussian interaction profile kernels for predicting drug–target interaction
van Laarhoven, T., Nabuurs, S. B., & Marchiori, E. (2011) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btr500 · Cited by 934
Luo, Y., Zhao, X., Zhou, J., Yang, J., Zhang, Y., Kuang, W., Peng, J., Chen, L., & Zeng, J. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-017-00680-8 · Cited by 916
Prediction of Drug-Target Interactions and Drug Repositioning via Network-Based Inference
Cheng, F., Liu, C., Jiang, J., Lu, W., Li, W., Liu, G., Zhou, W., Huang, J., & Tang, Y. (2012) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002503 · Cited by 818
The worst-case time complexity for generating all maximal cliques and computational experiments
Tomita, E., Tanaka, A., & Takahashi, H. (2006) · Theoretical Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2006.06.015 · Cited by 771
Drug–target interaction prediction: databases, web servers and computational models
Chen, X., Yan, C. C., Zhang, X., Zhang, X., Dai, F., Yin, J., & Zhang, Y. (2016) · Briefings in Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bib/bbv066 · Cited by 658
Metadata
- Authors
- Hattori, M., Okuno, Y., Goto, S., & Kanehisa, M.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Chemical Society
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2003-09-06
- Volume
- 125
- Issue
- 39
- Pages
- 11853-11865
- ISSN
- 0002-7863 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5126
- OpenAlex
- W1979537657
- Cited by
- 484
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 3.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.