Cited by 77Bioinformatics and Genomic NetworksGene Regulatory Network AnalysisGene expression and cancer classification

Co-expression networks: graph properties and topological comparisons

Open access
Xulvi-Brunet, Ramon, Li, Hongzhe·2010·Bioinformatics

Abstract

Motivation: Microarray-based gene expression data have been generated widely to study different biological processes and systems. Gene co-expression networks are often used to extract information about groups of genes that are ‘functionally’ related or co-regulated. However, the structural properties of such co-expression networks have not been rigorously studied and fully compared with known biological networks. In this article, we aim at investigating the structural properties of co-expression networks inferred for the species Saccharomyces Cerevisiae and comparing them with the topological properties of the known, well-established transcriptional network, MIPS physical network and protein–protein interaction (PPI) network of yeast. Results: These topological comparisons indicate that co-expression networks are not distinctly related with either the PPI or the MIPS physical interaction networks, showing important structural differences between them. When focusing on a more literal comparison, vertex by vertex and edge by edge, the conclusion is the same: the fact that two genes exhibit a high gene expression correlation degree does not seem to obviously correlate with the existence of a physical binding between the proteins produced by these genes or the existence of a MIPS physical interaction between the genes. The comparison of the yeast regulatory network with inferred yeast co-expression networks would suggest, however, that they could somehow be related. Conclusions: We conclude that the gene expression-based co-expression networks reflect more on the gene regulatory networks but less on the PPI or MIPS physical interaction networks. Contact: hongzhe@mail.med.upenn.edu Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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 · 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp632

Cites

1 of 1 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?

  • Literature broadly has reported common co-regulation of genes in protein complexes at both transcription and translational levels.

    “This is a unique finding since literature broadly has reported common co-regulation of genes in protein complexes at both transcription and translational levels96–102.”

    From EXOSC3 G191 Variants Trigger System-Wide Recalibration of RNA Processing Machinery (2026) · cites this paper as [101]

    The Conclusions and Discussion report strong gene-expression correlations for protein pairs in permanent complexes and note that a few large complexes appear in both protein-interaction and co-expression networks. The paper does not report co-regulation at the translational level, and it describes the overall relationship between expression and protein interactions as weak. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Efron,B. and Tibshirani,R.J. (1993) An Introduction to the Bootstrap. In Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability. Vol. 57, Chapman and Hall, New York.
  2. Mainshausen,N. and Buhlmann,P. (2006) High-dimensional graphs and variable selection with the lasso. Annals of Statistics, 34, 1436-1462.
  3. Newman,M.E.J. (2003a) The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Review, 45, 167-256.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xulvi-Brunet, R., & Li, H.
Affiliations
  • Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Li, Hongzhe
Venue
Bioinformatics
Published
2009-11-12
Volume
26
Issue
2
Pages
205-214
ISSN
  • 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
  • 1367-4811
OpenAlex
W2118636185
Cited by
77
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
1.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioinformatics (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA127334)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (R01ES009911)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
Keywords
gene co-expression network, network topology, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, protein-protein interaction network, transcriptional regulatory networks, gene regulatory networks, network structural properties, microarray gene expression, network comparison
MeSH terms
Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Computational Biology, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Protein Interaction Mapping, Databases, Genetic, Gene Regulatory Networks

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