Cited by 4,706Bioinformatics and Genomic NetworksFungal and yeast genetics researchAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications

A comprehensive analysis of protein–protein interactions in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Uetz, Peter, Giot, Loic, Cagney, Gerard, Mansfield, Traci A., Judson, Richard S., Knight, James R., Lockshon, Daniel, Narayan, Vaibhav +12 more·2000·Nature

Abstract

Two large-scale yeast two-hybrid screens were undertaken to identify protein-protein interactions between full-length open reading frames predicted from the Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome sequence. In one approach, we constructed a protein array of about 6,000 yeast transformants, with each transformant expressing one of the open reading frames as a fusion to an activation domain. This array was screened by a simple and automated procedure for 192 yeast proteins, with positive responses identified by their positions in the array. In a second approach, we pooled cells expressing one of about 6,000 activation domain fusions to generate a library. We used a high-throughput screening procedure to screen nearly all of the 6,000 predicted yeast proteins, expressed as Gal4 DNA-binding domain fusion proteins, against the library, and characterized positives by sequence analysis. These approaches resulted in the detection of 957 putative interactions involving 1,004 S. cerevisiae proteins. These data reveal interactions that place functionally unclassified proteins in a biological context, interactions between proteins involved in the same biological function, and interactions that link biological functions together into larger cellular processes. The results of these screens are shown here.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/35001009

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • High-throughput experimental techniques designed to identify interacting protein partners have results that are far from complete and often mutually inconsistent.

    “Several high-throughput experimental techniques have been designed to identify interacting protein partners23–26, but their results are far from complete and are often mutually inconsistent.”
  • Y2H, APMS, and other high-throughput experimental approaches have identified many pairs of interacting proteins in yeast and other organisms, but there are discrepancies between sets generated using different methods and considerable false positive and false negative rates.

    “Yeast two hybrid (Y2H), affinity-purification mass spectrometry (APMS), and other high-throughput experimental approaches have identified many pairs of interacting proteins in yeast and other organisms (1–5), but there are discrepancies between sets generated using the different methods and considerable false positive and false negative rates (6–8).”

    From Computed structures of core eukaryotic protein complexes (2021) · cites this paper as [4]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Uetz, P., Giot, L., Cagney, G., Mansfield, T. A., Judson, R. S., Knight, J. R., Lockshon, D., Narayan, V., Srinivasan, M., Pochart, P., Qureshi-Emili, A., Li, Y., Godwin, B., Conover, D., Kalbfleisch, T., Vijayadamodar, G., Yang, M., Johnston, M., Fields, S., & Rothberg, J. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
Fields, Stanley
Venue
Nature
Published
2000-02
Volume
403
Issue
6770
Pages
623-627
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2065304353
Cited by
4,706
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 62 · 2020: 56 · 2019: 79 · 2018: 83 · 2017: 83 · 2016: 78 · 2015: 119 · 2014: 130 · 2013: 174 · 2012: 193
FWCI
116.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Keywords
protein-protein interaction, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, yeast two-hybrid screen, protein microarrays, GAL4 DNA-binding domain, high-throughput screening, protein-protein interaction network, cellular processes
MeSH terms
Fungal Proteins, Protein Binding, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Open Reading Frames, Protein Structure, Tertiary, Peptide Library, Two-Hybrid System Techniques

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