Cited by 795Bioinformatics and Genomic NetworksAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFungal and yeast genetics research

Toward a Comprehensive Atlas of the Physical Interactome of Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Open access
Collins, Sean R., Kemmeren, Patrick, Zhao, Xue-Chu, Greenblatt, Jack F., Spencer, Forrest, Holstege, Frank C.P., Weissman, Jonathan S., Krogan, Nevan J.·2007·Molecular & Cellular Proteomics

Abstract

Defining protein complexes is critical to virtually all aspects of cell biology.Two recent affinity purification/mass spectrometry studies in Saccharomyces cerevisiae have vastly increased the available protein interaction data.The practical utility of such high throughput interaction sets, however, is substantially decreased by the presence of false positives.Here we created a novel probabilistic metric that takes advantage of the high density of these data, including both the presence and absence of individual associations, to provide a measure of the relative confidence of each potential protein-protein interaction.This analysis largely overcomes the noise inherent in high throughput immunoprecipitation experiments.For example, of the 12,122 binary interactions in the general repository of interaction data (BioGRID) derived from these two studies, we marked 7504 as being of substantially lower confidence.Additionally, applying our metric and a stringent cutoff we identified a set of 9074 interactions (including 4456 that were not among the 12,122 interactions) with accuracy comparable to that of conventional small scale methodologies.Finally we organized proteins into coherent multisubunit complexes using hierarchical clustering.This work thus provides a highly accurate physical interaction map of yeast in a format that is readily accessible to the biological community. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 6:439 -450, 2007.Because most cellular functions are mediated by groups of physically associated proteins or complexes that work in a coherent fashion, it is of great interest to systematically map protein-protein interactions (PPIs). 1 In Saccharomyces cerevi-

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 · 10.1074/mcp.m600381-mcp200

Cites

57 of 57 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?

  • 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 [2]

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
Collins, S. R., Kemmeren, P., Zhao, X.-C., Greenblatt, J. F., Spencer, F., Holstege, F. C. P., Weissman, J. S., & Krogan, N. J.
Affiliations
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • QB3 (US)
Corresponding author
  • Weissman, Jonathan S.
  • Krogan, Nevan J.
Venue
Molecular & Cellular Proteomics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-03
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
439-450
ISSN
1535-9476 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2116447934
Cited by
795
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 42 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 54 · 2013: 55 · 2012: 77
FWCI
31.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular & Cellular Proteomics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
Keywords
protein-protein interaction, protein complexes, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, BioGRID, affinity purification, false positives, hierarchical clustering
MeSH terms
Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Cluster Analysis, Proteome, Protein Interaction Mapping, Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins, Databases, Protein

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