4.5 Article

Prediction and Comparison of Salmonella-Human and Salmonella-Arabidopsis Interactomes

期刊

CHEMISTRY & BIODIVERSITY
卷 9, 期 5, 页码 991-1018

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/cbdv.201100392

关键词

Systems biology; Interactomes; Salmonella proteins; Arabidopsis proteins; Protein?protein interactions (PPI)

资金

  1. Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) under the EU ERA-NET [EUI2009-04018]
  2. MICINN (Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation) under the EU ERA-NET [EUI2009-04018]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Salmonellosis caused by Salmonella bacteria is a food-borne disease and a worldwide health threat causing millions of infections and thousands of deaths every year. This pathogen infects an unusually broad range of host organisms including human and plants. A better understanding of the mechanisms of communication between Salmonella and its hosts requires identifying the interactions between Salmonella and host proteins. Protein?protein interactions (PPIs) are the fundamental building blocks of communication. Here, we utilize the prediction platform BIANA to obtain the putative Salmonella?human and Salmonella?Arabidopsis interactomes based on sequence and domain similarity to known PPIs. A gold standard list of Salmonella?host PPIs served to validate the quality of the human model. 24,726 and 10,926 PPIs comprising interactions between 38 and 33 Salmonella effectors and virulence factors with 9,740 human and 4,676 Arabidopsis proteins, respectively, were predicted. Putative hub proteins could be identified, and parallels between the two interactomes were discovered. This approach can provide insight into possible biological functions of so far uncharacterized proteins. The predicted interactions are available via a web interface which allows filtering of the database according to parameters provided by the user to narrow down the list of suspected interactions. The interactions are available via a web interface at http://sbi.imim.es/web/SHIPREC.php.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据