Abstract
This chapter aims at demonstrating the utility of network approaches in classification and outlier detection tasks in the context of stem cell biology and related fields. With modern high-through-put methods it has now become easier and cheaper to accurately measure thousands of features on a genome-wide scale than to define a low number of markers that can be tested, for example with low throughput RT-PCR assays. Typically the number of potential markers exceeds the number of experiments by several orders of magnitude. Therefore the significance – let alone mechanistic involvement – of each possible feature cannot be guaranteed from the data alone. Fortunately, easy-to-use implementations of many powerful network based algorithms have been made freely available so one can readily employ these advanced algorithms on new high-content datasets.
We will exemplify how network information and structure can be used to improve the prediction of biological phenotypes, and discuss methodological considerations pertinent to enabling reliable and biologically meaningful inferences from in silico network studies. We will touch upon difficulties inferring “true” (i.e. mechanistic) networks from biological data and note that, from a practical standpoint, in silico networks need not to fully reflect observable biological phenomena for real-world predictability and utility. We have found that a particularly successful strategy is to use statistical learning theory as a stringent framework for comparative evaluation of alternative network methods. This pragmatic and evolutionary approach can be adopted in several biological realms and makes optimal use of todays sophisticated network modeling methodologies. We observe that only such a rigorous workflow can guarantee reproducibility of network-based findings.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Müller F-J, Schuldt BM, Williams R, Mason D, Altun G, Papapetrou EP et al (2011) A bioinformatic assay for pluripotency in human cells. Nat Methods 8:315–317
Schöler HR, Hatzopoulos AK, Balling R, Suzuki N, Gruss P (1989) A family of octamer-specific proteins present during mouse embryogenesis: evidence for germline-specific expression of an Oct factor. EMBO J 8(9):2543–2550
Schöler HR, Balling R, Hatzopoulos AK, Suzuki N, Gruss P (1989) Octamer binding proteins confer transcriptional activity in early mouse embryogenesis. EMBO J 8(9):2551–2557
Takahashi K, Yamanaka S (2006) Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell 126(4):663–676
Kim JB, Greber B, Araúzo-Bravo MJ, Meyer J, Park KI, Zaehres H et al (2009) Direct reprogramming of human neural stem cells by OCT4. Nature 461(7264):649–653
Andrews PW, Fenderson B, Hakomori S (1987) Human embryonal carcinoma cells and their differentiation in culture. Int J Androl 10(1):95–104
Leek JT, Scharpf RB, Bravo HC, Simcha D, Langmead B, Johnson WE et al (2010) Tackling the widespread and critical impact of batch effects in high-throughput data. Nat Rev Genet 11(10):733–739
Chin MH, Mason MJ, Xie W, Volinia S, Singer M, Peterson C et al (2009) Induced pluripotent stem cells and embryonic stem cells are distinguished by gene expression signatures. Cell Stem Cell 5(1):111–123
Newman AM, Cooper JB (2010) Lab-specific gene expression signatures in pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 7(2):258–262
Christodoulou C, Longmire TA, Shen SS, Bourdon A, Sommer CA, Gadue P et al (2011) Mouse ES and iPS cells can form similar definitive endoderm despite differences in imprinted genes. J Clin Invest 121(6):2313–2325
Bock C, Kiskinis E, Verstappen G, Gu H, Boulting G, Smith ZD et al (2011) Reference maps of human ES and iPS cell variation enable high-throughput characterization of pluripotent cell lines. Cell 144(3):439–452
Leek JT, Storey JD (2007) Capturing heterogeneity in gene expression studies by surrogate variable analysis. PLoS Genet 3(9):1724–1735
Boulting GL, Kiskinis E, Croft GF, Amoroso MW, Oakley DH, Wainger BJ et al (2011) A functionally characterized test set of human induced pluripotent stem cells. Nat Biotechnol 29(3):279–286
Morizane A, Doi D, Kikuchi T, Nishimura K, Takahashi J (2011) Small-molecule inhibitors of bone morphogenic protein and activin/nodal signals promote highly efficient neural induction from human pluripotent stem cells. J Neurosci Res 89(2):117–126
Chambers SM, Fasano CA, Papapetrou EP, Tomishima M, Sadelain M, Studer L (2009) Highly efficient neural conversion of human ES and iPS cells by dual inhibition of SMAD signaling. Nat Biotechnol 27(3):275–280
Thomson M, Liu SJ, Zou L-N, Smith Z, Meissner A, Ramanathan S (2011) Pluripotency factors in embryonic stem cells regulate differentiation into germ layers. Cell 45(6):875–889
Kim H, Lee G, Ganat Y, Papapetrou EP, Lipchina I, Socci ND et al (2011) miR-371-3 expression predicts neural differentiation propensity in human pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 8(6):695–706
Kalman R (1959) On the general theory of control systems. IRE Trans Autom Control 4:481–492
Liu Y-Y, Slotine J-J, Barabási A-L (2011) Controllability of complex networks. Nature 473:167–173
Stumpf MPH, Thorne T, de Silva E, Stewart R, An HJ, Lappe M et al (2008) Estimating the size of the human interactome. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(19):6959–6964
Deane CM, Salwiński Ł, Xenarios I, Eisenberg D (2002) Protein interactions: two methods for assessment of the reliability of high throughput observations. Mol Cell Proteomics 1(5):349–356
Huang H, Bader JS (2009) Precision and recall estimates for two-hybrid screens. Bioinformatics 25(3):372–378
Ulitsky I, Shamir R (2007) Identification of functional modules using network topology and high-throughput data. BMC Syst Biol 1:8
Müller F-J, Laurent LC, Kostka D, Ulitsky I, Williams R, Lu C et al (2008) Regulatory networks define phenotypic classes of human stem cell lines. Nature 455(7211):401–405
Markowetz F, Troyanskaya OG (2007) Computational identification of cellular networks and pathways. Mol Biosyst 3(7):478–482
Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J (2009) The elements of statistical learning: data mining, inference, and prediction, 2nd edn. Springer, New York
Marbach D, Prill RJ, Schaffter T, Mattiussi C, Floreano D, Stolovitzky G (2010) Revealing strengths and weaknesses of methods for gene network inference. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107(14):6286–6291
Wong DJ, Liu H, Ridky TW, Cassarino D, Segal E, Chang HY (2008) Module map of stem cell genes guides creation of epithelial cancer stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 2(4):333–344
Langfelder P, Horvath S (2008) WGCNA: an R package for weighted correlation network analysis. BMC Bioinformatics 9:559
MacArthur BD, Ma’ayan A, Lemischka IR (2009) Systems biology of stem cell fate and cellular reprogramming. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 10(10):672–681
Joshi A, De Smet R, Marchal K, Van de Peer Y, Michoel T (2009) Module networks revisited: computational assessment and prioritization of model predictions. Bioinformatics 25(4):7
Brunet J-P, Tamayo P, Golub TR, Mesirov JP (2004) Metagenes and molecular pattern discovery using matrix factorization. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101(12):4164–4169
Fiedler B, Schuppert A (2008) Local identification of hybrid models with tree structure. IMA J Appl Math 73:449–476
Guenther MG, Frampton GM, Soldner F, Hockemeyer D, Mitalipova M, Jaenisch R et al (2010) Chromatin structure and gene expression programs of human embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 7(2):249–257
Pascual-Montano A, Carmona-Saez P, Chagoyen M, Tirado F, Carazo JM, Pascual-Marqui RD (2006) bioNMF: a versatile tool for non-negative matrix factorization in biology. BMC Bioinformatics 7:366
Kim PM, Tidor B (2003) Subsystem identification through dimensionality reduction of large-scale gene expression data. Genome Res 13(7):1706–1718
Gao Y, Church G (2005) Improving molecular cancer class discovery through sparse non-negative matrix factorization. Bioinformatics 21(21):3970–3975
Ramalho-Santos M, Yoon S, Matsuzaki Y, Mulligan RC, Melton DA (2002) “Stemness”: transcriptional profiling of embryonic and adult stem cells. Science 298(5593):597–600
Ivanova NB, Dimos JT, Schaniel C, Hackney JA, Moore KA, Lemischka IR (2002) A stem cell molecular signature. Science 298(5593):601–604
Phillips RL, Ernst RE, Brunk B, Ivanova N, Mahan MA, Deanehan JK et al (2000) The genetic program of hematopoietic stem cells. Science 288(5471):1635–1640
Loring JF, Porter JG, Seilhammer J, Kaser MR, Wesselschmidt R (2001) A gene expression profile of embryonic stem cells and embryonic stem cell-derived neurons. Restor Neurol Neurosci 18(2-3):81–88
Terskikh AV, Easterday MC, Li L, Hood L, Kornblum HI, Geschwind DH et al (2001) From hematopoiesis to neuropoiesis: evidence of overlapping genetic programs. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98(14):7934–7939
Fortunel NO (2003) Comment on “ ‘stemness’: transcriptional profiling of embryonic and adult stem cells” and “a stem cell molecular signature” [I]. Science 302(5644):393b–393
Pearson K (1901) On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space. Phil Mag Ser 62(11):559–572
Lee DD, Seung HS (1999) Learning the parts of objects by non-negative matrix factorization. Nature 401(6755):788–791
Müller F-J, Goldmann J, Löser P, Loring JF (2010) A call to standardize teratoma assays used to define human pluripotent cell lines. Cell Stem Cell 6(5):412–414
Som A, Harder C, Greber B, Siatkowski M, Paudel Y, Warsow G et al (2010) The PluriNetWork: an electronic representation of the network underlying pluripotency in mouse, and its applications. PLoS One 5(12):e15165
Tax D, Muller K-R (2004) A consistency-based model selection for one-class classification 2004. In: ICPR 2004. Proceedings of the 17th international conference on pattern recognition, vol 3, Cambridge, UK, CA, pp 363–366
Schuppert A (1999) Extrapolability of structured hybrid models: a key to the optimization of complex processes. In: Bernold F, Konrad G, Juergen S (eds) Proceedings of the international conference on differential equations, Berlin, Germany, 1–7 August 1999. World Scientific Publishing, Singapore, pp 1135–1151
Schuppert A (2011) Efficient reengineering of Meso-scale topologies for functional networks in biomedical applications. J Math Ind 1:6
Schuppert A, Burghaus R, Von Törne C, Schwers S, Stropp U, Kallabis H (2006) Method for identifying predictive biomarkers from patient data. Patent WO/2007/07/9875
Acknowledgements
We thank Qiong Lin, Michael Lenz and Jeanne Loring for valuable discussions. FJM is supported by an Else-Kröner Fresenius Stiftung fellowship. BMS is supported by Bayer Technology Services GmbH and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [GSC 111].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schuldt, B.M., Müller, FJ., Schuppert, A.A. (2012). What Can Networks Do for You?. In: Ma'ayan, A., MacArthur, B. (eds) New Frontiers of Network Analysis in Systems Biology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4330-4_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4330-4_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-4329-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-4330-4
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)