Skip to main content
Scientific Reports logoLink to Scientific Reports
. 2015 Sep 25;5:14438. doi: 10.1038/srep14438

Graph theoretic network analysis reveals protein pathways underlying cell death following neurotropic viral infection

Sourish Ghosh 1, G Vinodh Kumar 1, Anirban Basu 1, Arpan Banerjee 1,a
PMCID: PMC4585883  PMID: 26404759

Abstract

Complex protein networks underlie any cellular function. Certain proteins play a pivotal role in many network configurations, disruption of whose expression proves fatal to the cell. An efficient method to tease out such key proteins in a network is still unavailable. Here, we used graph-theoretic measures on protein-protein interaction data (interactome) to extract biophysically relevant information about individual protein regulation and network properties such as formation of function specific modules (sub-networks) of proteins. We took 5 major proteins that are involved in neuronal apoptosis post Chandipura Virus (CHPV) infection as seed proteins in a database to create a meta-network of immediately interacting proteins (1st order network). Graph theoretic measures were employed to rank the proteins in terms of their connectivity and the degree upto which they can be organized into smaller modules (hubs). We repeated the analysis on 2nd order interactome that includes proteins connected directly with proteins of 1st order. FADD and Casp-3 were connected maximally to other proteins in both analyses, thus indicating their importance in neuronal apoptosis. Thus, our analysis provides a blueprint for the detection and validation of protein networks disrupted by viral infections.


Metabolic functions are outcomes of interactions among various cellular proteins. An emerging concept in the field of proteomics is that the understanding of these interactions is critical for elucidating the mechanism of metabolic functions1,2. However, parsing interactions important for certain functions or a disease involves analyzing huge interactomes containing information about a large number of genes and proteins along with their interacting partners. Mathematical modelling has been instrumental in analyzing these huge datasets and systematically understanding the interplay between various proteins and the metabolic functions involved3,4,5. Recent technical developments consider the huge protein interactome as a complex graph wherein individual proteins are nodes of the graph and the interactions are modelled as the edges6. Graph theoretic analysis provides an efficient handle to decipher various aspects of proteins in a network that interact with a specific functional objective. For example, is one protein more important than others, does a group of protein exhibit more interactions (densely connected) than other groups, do some proteins act as hubs through which majority of interactions are routed? Graph theory provides several parameters to study properties of constituent proteins in an interactome: degree centrality, clustering, betweenness, shortest path, modularity, etc., each of which may be meaningful for understanding function7,8,9. Based on a hypothesis about the operational structure of the interactome, researchers can decide upon what parameters to investigate.

Modularity quantifies how the nodes of a network are interacting among each other to form “hubs”10. Hubs or modules are closely interacting group of nodes with more connections within the module and sparse connections between modules. Real world networks such as the Internet, power grids, brain network exhibit such properties11,12,13. Thus, using modularity, researchers can quantify how many “hubs” of proteins are formed within a given interactome and whether a particular module is the key facilitator of a specific function/disease. Another useful measure using graph theory on interactome data is degree centrality. Degree centrality quantifies the individual contribution of a node (protein) to the interactome14. Depending upon the degree centrality score, the most dominating protein in a particular network can be characterized.

Chandipura Virus (CHPV) a member of the Rhabdoviridae family, has been ranked among the emerging viruses in the Indian subcontinent. CHPV was first identified in two patients in the year 1965 from the Chandipura village in Maharashtra (India)15. The first major outbreak took place in 2003 and resulted in death of 183 children. This was followed by sporadic attacks every year. Presently CHPV has a case-by-case fatality rate of around 55–77%16,17,18. The virus has been reported to cause encephalitis along with neurodegeneration leading to death. Common symptoms which have been diagnosed are high grade fever, vomiting, altered sensorium, generalized convulsions, decerebrate posture and coma. CHPV, being an arbovirus with sand flies (Phlebotomus sps.) as the carrier (vector), enters the host system through the skin, penetrating into the circulatory system of the body (which is also referred to as peripheral circulatory system). CHPV is cleared off the peripheral circulatory system by the host immune system within a couple of days post infection as observed in a mouse model18,19,20. But this virus finds a safe place to replicate in the brain.

In an earlier article some of us have shown in a mouse model that CHPV induces neuronal death through a Fas-mediated extrinsic apoptosis pathway17. From there we identified 5 proteins pertaining to the extrinsic apoptotic pathway. However, from this analysis we did not get the information about all the proteins that may be involved in the apoptotic process following CHPV infection.

In this article, we identified a large number of proteins (from an online database) that interact with the five proteins whose expressions were monitored in the earlier wet-lab experiment of CHPV infection17. The resultant network of proteins constituted a “1st order interactome” Furthermore, we estimated a “2nd order interactome” by identifying the proteins that were directly interacting with the 1st order interactome. We calculated the modularity of 1st order and 2nd order interactomes and degree centrality of individual proteins. These two measures quantified both a global measure of segregation of network and an individual connectivity measure of candidate proteins. 2nd order connectome results were used to test the robustness of 1st order connectome results and address the issue of predictive validity of the model. Together they revealed the protein-protein network configuration underlying neuronal apoptosis following CHPV infection. The issue of face validity was addressed by comparisons of empirical measures with those computed on simulated random networks. The methods and results obtained here provide an operational blueprint for understanding the pivotal dependencies of the virus within the host system and will help in the conceptualization and design of effective therapeutics.

Results

From our results in an earlier study17 we concluded that CHPV induces neuronal apoptosis through Fas-mediated extrinsic apoptotic pathway with the involvement of the following five proteins: Fas, Fas-associated Death Domain (FADD), Caspase-8 (Casp- 8), cleaved Caspase-3 (Casp- 3), and X-linked inhibitor of apoptosis (XIAP) (Fig. 1, see also Methods section for more details). These 5 proteins were inserted as inputs to STRING 9.1 online database (http://string-db.org/) for extraction of the 1st and 2nd order interactomes. The 1st order interactome contained 26 proteins while the 2nd order contained 71 proteins (Fig. 1b,c). The names of each protein from 1st and 2nd order interactomes are presented in Table 1.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

(a) Interactions between monitored proteins Fas, FADD, Casp-8, Casp-3 and XIAP estimated using STRING 9.1 database (b) Proteins interacting directly with Fas, FADD, Casp-8, Casp-3 and XIAP were estimated using STRING 9.1 database. The nodes represent the proteins while the lines indicate interactions in this 1st order interactome. Only those proteins reported at a confidence level of 95% are considered. (c) The proteins interacting directly with the nodes of 1st order interactome were extracted analogously to capture the 2nd order interactome.

Table 1. Protein names, community structure value (Ci) score of the 1st and 2nd order interactome.

    Module
    Module
    Module
Protein Name Protein 1st 2nd Protein Name Protein 1st 2nd Protein Name Protein 1st 2nd
Caspase-3 Casp3 1 2 Caspase-7 Casp7 4 2 Cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 1A (P21) Cdkn1a   1
Caspase-8 Casp8 2 3 Direct IAP binding protein with low pI Diablo 4 2 Forkhead box O4 Foxo4   1
Fas Fas 2 3 Proto-oncogene tyrosine-protein kinase Fyn   2 cAMP responsive element binding protein 1 Creb1   10
Fas-associated Death Domain Fadd 2 3 Cylindromatosis Cyld   3 Transformed mouse 3T3 cell double minute 2 Mdm2   10
X-linked inhibitor of apoptosis protein Xiap 4 2 Cluster of Differentiation- 40 Cd40   3 Cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 1B Cdkn1b   1
Fas Ligand Fasl 2 3 TNF receptor-associated factor 3 Traf3   8 Forkhead box O1 Foxo1   1
Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF) receptor-associated factor 2 Traf2 3 3 Ubiquitin-c Ubc   10 Tuberous sclerosis 2 Tsc2   1
Tumor necrosis factor receptor type 1-associated DEATH domain Tradd 3 3 Toll-like receptor adaptor molecule 1 Ticam1   8 Mechanistic target of rapamycin (serine/threonine kinase) Mtor   1
Receptor-interacting serine/threonine-protein kinase 1 Ripk1 3 3 Death domain-containing protein Cradd   3 Phosphatase and tensin homolog Pten   1
CASP8 and FADD-like apoptosis regulator Cflar 2 3 Inhibitor of nuclear factor kappa-B kinase subunit gamma Ikbkg   3 RPTOR independent companion of MTOR, complex 2 Rictor   1
Tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily, member 10b Tnfrsf10b 2 3 TNF receptor-associated factor 1 Traf1   8 SMT3 suppressor of mif two 3 homolog 1 Sumo1   6
B-cell receptor associated protein 31 Bcap31 2 3 Toll-like receptor 4 Tlr4   8 Mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase kinase 5 Map3k5   1
Baculoviral IAP repeat-containing protein 2 Birc2 4 8 Mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase kinase 7 map3k7   8 DNA methyltransferase 1-associated protein 1 Dmap1   10
                       
Baculoviral IAP repeat-containing protein 3 birc3 4 8 Profilin1 Pfn1   10 Homeodomain interacting protein kinase 1 Hipk1   10
Gelsolin Gsn 1 10 B cell leukemia/lymphoma 2 Bcl2   1 Alpha thalassemia/mental retardation syndrome X-linked homolog Atrx   10
DNA fragmentation factor subunit alpha Dffa 1 2 BCL2-like 11 (apoptosis facilitator) bcl2l11   1 v-rel avian reticuloendotheliosis viral oncogene homolog A Rela   9
DNA fragmentation factor subunit beta Dffb 1 2 Signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 Stat3   8 FBJ osteosarcoma oncogene Fos   9
Apoptotic protease activating factor 1 Apaf1 4 2 Furin Furin   10 Adiponectin, C1Q and collagen domain containing Adipoq   5
Nerve Growth Factor Ngf 1 11 Transient receptor potential cation channel, subfamily V, member 1 Trpv1   8 Leptin Lep   9
RAC-alpha serine/threonine-protein kinase Akt1 1 1 Fibroblast growth factor receptor substrate 2 Frs2   3 Interleukin-6 Il6   9
Death-associated protein 6 Daxx 2 10 Neurotrophic tyrosine kinase, receptor, type 2 Ntrk2   3 Interleukin-1a Il1a   9
Tumor Necrosis Factor Tnf 3 9 Nerve growth factor receptor (TNFR superfamily, member 16) Ngfr   8 Peroxisome proliferative activated receptor, gamma, coactivator 1 alpha Ppargc1a   7
Tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily member 1A tnfrsf1a 3 3 Neurotrophic tyrosine kinase, receptor, type 1 Ntrk1   8 Calspin Clspn   10
Caspase-9 Casp9 4 2 src homology 2 domain-containing transforming protein C1 Shc1   8        

The protein names for the table were arranged according to the chronology in which they have been queried from the STRING 9.1 database. The first 5 are the proteins whose expressions were monitored empirically the next 21 were the primary interacting partners. The next 45 secondary interacting partners were added to the list.

The MATLAB-based Visual Connectome Toolbox21 was used for graph-theoretic analysis of 1st and 2nd order interactome data. We computed the degrees of freedom (degree centrality) for each protein in the 1st & 2nd order networks. Subsequently, we arranged them in a descending order (Table 2). From Table 2, we observed that in both 1st and 2nd order networks FADD and Casp-3 are the common members among the top 5 proteins having highest degree centrality values. Mutual cross-validation of results from 1st and 2nd order network analysis confirms that FADD and Casp-3 are dominant players in apoptotic pathway underlying CHPV infection in neurons. Modularity determines how well a network can be divided into subgroups (hubs). Generally the modularity score ranges between [−0.5, 1) with more modular networks having a positive score. A more randomly assigned network will have a modularity score of approximately zero. We computed modularity scores of both 1st and 2nd order networks sets. The modularity score of the 1st order network was 0.36 while the 2nd order was 0.41. Theoretically, due to the random partitioning of nodes into modules to initiate the graph theoretic algorithm, the results may vary trial to trial unless the modular structure is significantly unambiguous. In our data set the modularity score remained unchanged in all 50 repetitions of the analysis. Additionally, we evaluated the significance of the estimated modularity score by comparing with the modularity scores of a random network with an identical number of nodes. We start with an adjacency matrix with all values set to zero for a given number of nodes. Then we randomly assigned a value 1 in upper diagonal matrix locations. Finally, symmetric locations in lower diagonal positions are assigned values 1 to design the adjacency matrix for which network metrics are computed. Diagonal elements were always assigned a value 0 to avoid self-connections. The mean modularity score of a random network (50 repetitions) with 26 nodes was 0.13, whereas for a random network with 71 nodes, the score was 0.09. In both cases the estimated modularity values of the empirical networks were statistically significant at Bonferroni corrected p < 0.05 (χ2 = 20.67, df = 1 for 1st order and χ2 = 58.40, df = 1 for 2nd order interactome). In case of the 1st order network, our analysis indicated the presence of 4 modules whereas in case of 2nd order network 12 modules were identified.

Table 2. The protein names were arranged in decreasing order according to their respective degree centrality (Z) scores for both 1st (a) and 2nd order (b) interactome.

1st Order
2nd Order
Protein Z score Protein Z score Protein Z score Protein Z score
Casp3 1.9518 Akt1 3.1326 Ntrk1 0 Ntrk2 −0.4472
Casp8 1.569143 Casp8 2.0533 Shc1 0 Fas −0.5019
Casp9 1.224745 Ngf 1.7889 Mdm2 0 Fasl −0.5019
Casp7 1.224745 Fadd 1.7339 Sumo1 0 Tradd −0.5019
Fadd 0.998545 Casp3 1.6202 Map3k5 0 Tnfrsf10b −0.5019
Diablo 0.612372 Tnf 1.3618 Dmap1 0 Apaf1 −0.5401
Fas 0.427948 Il6 1.3618 Hipk1 0 Rela −0.5447
Traf2 0 Ripk1 1.0951 Atrx 0 Lep −0.5447
Tradd 0 Casp9 0.9001 Adipoq 0 Il1a −0.5447
Ripk1 0 Birc2 0.7771 Ppargc1a 0 Cdkn1a −0.7627
Tnf 0 birc3 0.7771 Clspn 0 Foxo4 −0.7627
tnfrsf1a 0 Cd40 0.7771 bcl2l11 −0.0545 Cyld −0.8213
Fasl −0.14265 Tlr4 0.7771 Stat3 −0.0545 Traf1 −0.9991
Cflar −0.14265 Traf2 0.4563 Foxo1 −0.0545 Bcap31 −1.1407
Tnfrsf10b −0.14265 Tsc2 0.2996 Traf3 −0.111 Cradd −1.1407
Dffa −0.24398 Mtor 0.2996 map3k7 −0.111 Creb1 −1.1802
Dffb −0.24398 Xiap 0.18 Cflar −0.1825 Dffa −1.2601
Ngf −0.24398 Casp7 0.18 Ikbkg −0.1825 Dffb −1.2601
Akt1 −0.24398 Diablo 0.18 Fyn −0.4086 Ticam1 −1.8872
Xiap −0.61237 tnfrsf1a 0.1369 Bcl2 −0.4086    
Birc2 −0.61237 Fos 0.0908 Cdkn1b −0.4086    
birc3 −0.61237 Gsn 0 Pten −0.4086    
Gsn −0.9759 Daxx 0 Rictor −0.4086    
Apaf1 −1.22474 Ubc 0 Furin −0.4472    
Bcap31 −1.28384 Pfn1 0 Trpv1 −0.4472    
Daxx −1.28384 Ngfr 0 Frs2 −0.4472    

Using the Ci scores from Table 1 and Fig. 2, we color coded each module in Fig. 1(b,c). Modules 2 and 4 of the 1st order interactome and module numbers 3 and 2 of 2nd order interactome, respectively were presented in identical colors because they have multiple common members. The common members of module number 2 from 1st order and 3 from 2nd order are Casp-8, Tnfrs10b, Cflar, Fas, FADD, TRADD. Module 4 from 1st order and 2 from 2nd order has Casp-9, Casp-7, XIAP, Apaf-1 and Diablo. Extraction of a consistent network structure from the analysis of 1st order and 2nd order interactomes provides confidence about the biological relevance of the key modules. Table 3 lists the UniProt IDs of all proteins identified in the 1st and 2nd order interactomes.

Figure 2. Representative plots for Community Structure (Ci) Vs protein node numbers were plotted in this figure for 1st (a) and 2nd (b) order interactomes.

Figure 2

The Ci value from each analysis was obtained from running the codes for 50 times. Thereafter the mean Ci values corresponding to the mean Modularity score (Q) for each protein was plotted against the corresponding protein node number.

Table 3. The table enlists the Uniprot identification numbers for all the proteins which were used in our analysis.

Protein Symbol UniProt ID Protein Symbol Uniprot ID
Casp3 P70677 map3k7 Q923A8
Casp8 O89110 Pfn1 P62962
Fas P25446 Bcl2 P10417
Fadd Q61160 bcl2l11 O54918
Xiap Q60989 Stat3 P42227
Fasl P41047 Furin P23188
Traf2 P39429 Trpv1 Q704Y3
Tradd Q3U0V2 Frs2 Q8C180
Ripk1 Q60855 Ntrk2 P15209
Cflar O35732 Ngfr Q8CFT3
Tnfrsf10b Q9QZM4 Ntrk1 Q3UFB7
Bcap31 Q61335 Shc1 P98083
Birc2 Q62210 Cdkn1a P39689
birc3 O08863 Foxo4 Q9WVH3
Gsn P13020 Creb1 Q01147
Dffa O54786 Mdm2 P23804
Dffb O54788 Cdkn1b P46414
Apaf1 O88879 Foxo1 Q9R1E0
Ngf P01139 Tsc2 Q7TT21
Akt1 P31750 Mtor Q9JLN9
Daxx O35613 Pten O08586
Tnf P06804 Rictor Q6QI06
tnfrsf1a P25118 Sumo1 P63166
Casp9 Q8C3Q9 Map3k5 Q14AY4
Casp7 P97864 Dmap1 Q9JI44
Diablo Q9JIQ3 Hipk1 O88904
Fyn P39688 Atrx Q61687
Cyld Q80TQ2 Rela Q04207
Cd40 P27512 Fos P01101
Traf3 Q60803 Adipoq Q60994
Ubc P0CG50 Lep P41160
Ticam1 Q80UF7 Il6 P08505
Cradd O88843 Il1a P01582
Ikbkg Q8VC91 Ppargc1a O70343
Traf1 P39428 Clspn Q80YR7
Tlr4 Q9QUK6    

Discussion

In this report we propose an analysis framework to compute the modular structure of a complex protein-protein interaction network (interactome). The choice of seed proteins: Fas, Fas associated Death Domain (FADD), Caspase-8, Caspase-3 and X-linked Inhibitor of Apoptosis Protein (XIAP) for the construction of the interactome was guided from our previous experimental findings17. These were apoptotic proteins over-expressed in mouse neurons following Chandipura Virus infection. We used the STRING 9.1 database to compute the first order interactome. There are currently several bioinformatics toolboxes available, each with their own set of unique controls. We chose STRING 9.1 because it was the only method to the best of our knowledge that allowed us to prune networks based on a statistical confidence level. However, it is pertinent to note that the database used to extract the interactome will immensely influence the estimation of any functional modular structure. A study comparing the interactomes extracted from several data sets may potentially help future research in terms of data interpretation. Next, we computed the graph theory metrics: Modularity Score (Q), Community Structure (Ci) and Degree Centrality (Z) to infer further about the protein-protein interactions underlying apoptosis. To establish the predictive validity of our analysis, we constructed a second order interactome based on secondary interacting partners of the seed proteins using the STRING 9.1 database (at 95% confidence) and re-calculated the graph theory metrics. The consistent presence of key protein assemblies in the first order and second order interactomes provides confidence regarding the robustness of our approach. Finally, we compared the closeness of modularity and degree centrality computed in empirical networks with that obtained for simulated random networks. Since, no modular structures are expected in a random network, this addressed the issue of face-validity, that is, whether the method is successful in extracting meaningful information and helped us control false positives.

Modularity score (Q) of a network ranges between [−0.5, 1) with negative Q scores signifying random interactions within the network. As the within group interactions increase, the network starts to become more modular and the Q value shifts more towards the positive side nearing to 1. For every network there exists an optimal Q value beyond which the modularity score cannot be enhanced even if we increase the number of modules. In our case we have determined the Q values of 1st order and 2nd order ineractome are 0.3911 and 0.4716, respectively. These scores were stable across 50 independent runs. The community structure also remained unchanged. These two findings give us the confidence to state that protein-protein interactions are indeed highly modular due to their inherent biological properties. Hence it is pertinent that the interactive nodes of both the networks have been classified into a maximum number of possible modules. Next we focus on each module to decipher their biological significance.

In the first order interactome, 4 interactive modules were identified (Fig. 1b). We could clearly characterize that all proteins segregated in separate modules on the basis of their functional role in the apoptotic process. Module 2 and 3 consist of all the proteins which are mostly known as death domain (DD) and death-inducing signalling complex (DISC). Proteins like FADD, TRADD, Cflar RIPK1, Daxx, Bcap31, Tnfrs1a & 10b have been reported to contribute the DD22,23 while Caspase 8 and FADD forms the DISC24,25. Other members like Fas (Module 2) and TNF (Module 3) are commonly known as the initiators of the death process. Module 3 consists of proteins that are co-stimulators of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) induced cell death whereas Module 2 consists of proteins that contribute to both Fas and TNF pathways. Module 4 is a heterogeneous group that consists of both apoptotic activators and inhibitors that belong to caspase group. XIAP has been previously reported both in our previous report and other researchers to be a Casp3 antagonist17 while Birc2 & Birc3 are well known to be in association with TNF to combat the apoptosis signalling26,27. Surprisingly, TNF and Birc2 and Birc3 were not in the same module in our 1st order interactome. Other apoptotic activators of module 4 are Apaf-1 and Diablo along with the caspases like Casp 9 & 7. Overall this module represents proteins that are affecting the intermediate phase of apoptosis before the appearance of the final executioner of the apoptotic pathways. Module 1 is a classical cluster consisting of the close interactors of Casp3, the final executioner of the apoptotic pathway. This module consists of some of the targets of Casp3 which gets cleaved in order to bring about various changes in the cellular environment and to help in completion of the apoptotic process. Both Dffa and Dffb are cleaved by Casp3 to effect the DNA fragmentation28 while Gsn cleavage brings about morphological changes to the cell during apoptosis29. Ngf30 has been previously reported to be closely associated with Casp3. Akt-1 activation in response to cytokine receptor signalling has been associated with anti-apoptotic processes31. In our analysis we observed that although Akt-1 is linked with other modules, its association with Caspase-3 is strong, and as a result Akt-1 has been grouped in Module 1. However, the scenario changes drastically once we enhance the network including the primary interactors of each of the proteins in the 1st order interactome model to develop the 2nd order interactome.

The 2nd order interactome segregated into 12 modules, among which 7 were larger groups, each containing 6 or more members while the rest were smaller groups with single nodes (Fig. 1c). The module configurations of the 2nd order interactome clearly indicate that most members of module 3 and 2 are also present in module 2 & 4 of the 1st order interactome, respectively. Module 3 in 2nd order interactome consists of Casp-8 and FADD, key players of the DD and DISC processes. Module 2 is now an integrated assembly formed from nodes of module 1 and 4 of 1st order interactome and consists of proteins taking part in the intermediate stage and the final execution of apoptosis. A closer look at the 2nd order interactome reveals the 4 major groups apart from 2 and 3. Modules 1, 8 and 9 have been built around few of the major anti-apoptotic proteins of the 1st order interactome for example Akt1, Birc 2, Birc3, Traf2 and TNF. We observed that in 1st order interactome TNF and Traf2 were included within module 3 whereas in 2nd order interactome TNF and Traf2 were placed in modules 8 and 9 respectively. TNF has been earlier reported to be involved in activation of apoptotic pathways32,33. But from our analysis we propose TNF may have some anti-apoptotic function based on its interactions with cytokines IL-1a and IL-6, that have been reported to be involved in cell survival34,35. The modules 8, 10 and 11 being influenced by the anti-apoptotic proteins form a significant part of this network that was not so prominent in the 1st order interactome. Other modules such as 4, 5, 6, 7 and 12 although consisting of fewer members in the context of our study, have the potential to embark into larger modules if an even bigger network is considered. This is simply because these modules consist of very important proteins that have been known to play pivotal roles in apoptosis.

Degree centrality is simply defined as the interaction score of a particular node within a network. The more interactions a node has within a group of nodes which are mutually interacting among each other, the higher its chance will be to form a module. Hence the community structure formation largely depends upon degree centrality of the nodes within a complex network. Casp3 and FADD were ranked among top 5 proteins when nodes of 1st and 2nd order interactomes were sorted in terms of degree centrality (Table 2). This signifies the pivotal role played by these two proteins in apoptosis and also gives us confidence to interpret the biological significance of modules from graph-theoretic measures. In Table 2 we see an interesting pattern. Nodes in the 1st order interactome that have positive degree centrality scores remained to be in the positive side in the 2nd order interactome. However, degree centrality of nodes that had 0 or negative values in the 1st order connectome either enhanced or got depreciated in 2nd order. In order to explain this pattern we have to carefully analyze both the interactome models. Nodes having positive scores in the 1st order connectome interact not only maximally within their modules but also with other nodes in different modules. Hence, with the increase in number of interacting partners in the 2nd order interactome, the overall connectivity is enhanced for the constituent nodes. For example, Akt1 in the 1st order interactome interacts with several nodes of different modules but not consistently within one module. However, in the 2nd order interactome, the degree centrality of Akt1 increased and creation of a separate module involving Akt1 was observed36,37. Other nodes like TNF and Traf2 that were in one module in 1st order, increased their interactive partners and gained entry to bigger modules in 2nd order interactome. Nodes that have a predominant role to play in apoptosis maintained their modules and their degree centrality scores across both 1st and 2nd order interactome models.

In conclusion, we have outlined a robust method for studying the interactome underlying apoptosis following CHPV infection. This method may be used to study other metabolic pathways in order to yield important information about the strategic proteins of a specific network and the functionally important modules within the network. In the future, therapeutic targeting of particular proteins in case of various disease conditions needs to be investigated.

Methods

Empirical data

In an earlier study17, samples of Chandipura Virus was inoculated into Balb/c mouse intraperitoneally (i.p.) post-natal 10 days, at a plaque forming unit (pfu/ml) of 3 × 105. The animals developed CHPV related symptoms of hind limb paralysis, high grade fever and severe weight loss, within 72–96 hours post infection leading to death. From immunoblotting and immunostaining analyses performed on the extracted brain tissue, we found over-expression of 6 proteins of the extrinsic apoptosis pathway: Fas, FADD (Fas-associated Death Domain), Caspase-8, Caspase-3 and XIAP (Poly ADP Ribose Polymerase-1). Our results were further validated using RNAi studies, ELISA assays and flow-cytometric analyses17. Table 3 enlists the protein names with their corresponding Uniprot IDs.

Generation of meta-network

STRING (Search Tool for the Retrieval of Interacting Genes/Proteins) is an open datasource providing information about protein-protein interactions based on experimental data, computational prediction methods and public database38. STRING 9.1 database contains information about more than 5.4 million proteins and >1100 organisms39. The database has two modes of applications: Protein-mode (for protein interactions) and COG-mode (for gene interactions). STRING imports protein association information from databases of physical interaction and curated biological pathway knowledge (MINT, HPRD, BIND, DIP, BioGRID, KEGG, Reactome, IntAct, EcoCyc, NCI-Nature Pathway Interaction Database, GO). Protein/genes are queried to the STRING database which as an output that represents the associations in the form of a graph network with nodes (proteins/genes) and edges (interactions). The edges are weighted, integrated and a confidence score is assigned to each of them based upon the evidence of the association obtained from experimental data, computational prediction and public data collection methods. Based on these edges are assigned various shades of color (blue)38. The prediction methods generally used in determining the interactions are:

Neighbourhood

This method of prediction utilizes the theory that protein interactions validated in case of one or more species is predicted to carry more weightage and confidence score.

Gene Fusion

Proteins fused in one genome are likely to be functionally linked and hence carry stronger association.

Co-occurrence

Occurrence of two proteins within the same metabolic pathway is predicted to functionally linked with each other. Hence their co-occurrence strengthens their confidence score.

Co-expression

Simultaneous expression of two proteins is also predicted to have strong interaction between them.

Generation of 1st order interactome

The 5 proteins identified through molecular analyses were queries in the STRING 9.1 that produced 26 interacting partners as an output from the Mus musculus database. The STRING 9.1 software defines significance of the interactions between various queried proteins in terms of confidence score. This confidence score is an empirical score defined by the number of citations and experimental evidence for a particular interaction. The highest (0.95) confidence score in the database, that defines the significance of interactions between various queried protein was chosen to extract interactomes in this study. Furthermore, we limited the number of interacting partner to 1000 in the provision for maximum interacting partners using active prediction methods as neighbourhood, gene fusion, co-occurence and co-expression.

Generation of 2nd order network

In order to investigate the structure of an even larger network we queried for interacting partners of all the 26 proteins obtained from the previous analysis. The 2nd order connectome in Fig. 1b was generated from STRING 9.1 database using same confidence score (0.95) as for the 1st order connectome and limiting to 1000 interacting partners

Graph theoretic analysis

The adjacency matrices for graph theoretic analysis were created from 1st and 2nd order interactomes. Visual Connectome analysis tool box in MATLAB was used to compute the modularity score and the degree centrality of all the nodes40.

Degree Centrality

Degree centrality is the property that defines the connectivity of particular node with other nodes of the same network. This means the higher number of connections of a particular node with other nodes in a network, higher is its degree centrality. The node with the highest degree centrality is the one through which maximum edges pass.

Degree centrality of a vertex v, for a given graph G = (V,E) with |V| vertices and |E| edges is defined as

graphic file with name srep14438-m1.jpg

Modularity

Modularity score is used to measure the community structure within a network. The value of modularity ranges between [−0.5, 1) with 0 and negative values meaning a network with randomly assigned edges to positive values indicating highly communal structure. In a given graph G (V, E) which can be partitioned into two membership variables s. If a node v falls into community 1 then sv = 1 or else sv = −1. An adjacency matrix may be denoted by A, which says Avw = 1 means there is a connection between nodes v and w and Avw = 0 when there are no interactions. Modularity (Q) is then defined as the fraction of edges that fall within community 1 or 2, minus the expected number of edges within communities 1 and 2 for a random graph with the same node degree distribution as the given graph.

The expected number of edges will be calculated using the concept of Configuration Models41. The configuration model is a randomized representation of a particular graph. Given a network with n nodes, where each node v has a node degree kv, the configuration model intercepts each edge into two halves, and then each half edge is defined as a stub, that is rewired randomly with any other stub in the network even allowing self loops. Hence even though the node degree distribution of the graph remains intact, the configuration model results in a completely random network. Let the total number of stubs be

graphic file with name srep14438-m2.jpg

If two nodes v and w with node degrees kv and kw, respectively are these nodes, then

graphic file with name srep14438-m3.jpg
graphic file with name srep14438-m4.jpg
graphic file with name srep14438-m5.jpg

Modularity score is calculated as

graphic file with name srep14438-m6.jpg

The above equation is valid for two-community structure and can be generalized into c-community structure.

graphic file with name srep14438-m7.jpg

Modularity Optimization

The (6) can be re-written as:

graphic file with name srep14438-m8.jpg

where s is column vector whose elements are si; and B is a symmetric matrix

graphic file with name srep14438-m9.jpg

Bvw is also referred to as the modularity matrix which will be having elements whose rows and columns sum upto 0, so that it always has an eigen vector (1, 1, 1..) with eigen value 042. The algorithm that we used, initially divided the network into two communities and in further iterations the community structure is subdivided. For a group g of size ng we can express the contribution to modularity as

graphic file with name srep14438-m10.jpg

which simplify to: Inline graphic that can be expressed as

graphic file with name srep14438-m12.jpg

where δ stands for Kronecker δ symbol and Bg represents the ngXng matrix with vertices v, w in a particular group g having values of

graphic file with name srep14438-m13.jpg

Certainly (8) and (11) are similar and therefore spectral approach42 was applied to the generalized modularity matrix to maximize the values of ΔQ. Inline graphic for a complete network happens to be a symmetric matrix and thus (11) turns to nothing but (8). Once ΔQ is almost 0 for an indivisible network, then further subdividing beyond this point will not contribute to the increase in modularity value Q. This can be used to terminate community structure division.

The algorithm ran with the following theory: The modularity matrix, (9) was constructed for both interactomes and found the most positive eigenvalue and the corresponding eigenvector in each case. The algorithm divided the network into two parts depending upon the signs of the elements of the corresponding vectors, and then subdividing using the generalized modularity matrix (12). In the process ΔQ comes to 0 or negative at any stage of subdivision the algorithm left subgraph undivided. Hence, the algorithm would end at a certain point when the optimal network has been estimated. In order to fine tune this method of community structure optimization further, the Visual Connectome toolbox21 that we employed uses Kernighan-Lin algorithm43.

Additional Information

How to cite this article: Ghosh, S. et al. Graph theoretic network analysis reveals protein pathways underlying cell death following neurotropic viral infection. Sci. Rep. 5, 14438; doi: 10.1038/srep14438 (2015).

Acknowledgments

The study was supported by NBRC Core funds and by grants, (BT/PR7907/MED/29/702/2013) and a Tata Innovation Fellowship (BT/HRD/35/01/02/2014) to Anirban Basu from the Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Ministry of Science and Technology Government of India; Ramalingaswami fellowship, DBT (BT/RLF/Re-entry/31/2011) and Innovative Young Bio-technologist Award (IYBA), DBT (BT/07/IYBA/2013) to Arpan Banerjee(AB). AB also acknowledges the support of Centre of Excellence in Epilepsy and MEG (BT/01/COE/09/08/2011) from DBT.

Footnotes

Author Contributions S.G., A.Basu and A.Banerjee conceived the study; S.G., G.V.K and A.Banerjee prepared the figures; S.G. and A.Banerjee wrote the manuscript; S.G., G.V.K., A.Basu and A.Banerjee reviewed the manuscript.

References

  1. Beltrao P., Bork P., Krogan N. J. & van Noort V. Evolution and functional cross-talk of protein post-translational modifications. Mol Syst Biol 9, 714 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Kim J. & Copley S. D. Inhibitory cross-talk upon introduction of a new metabolic pathway into an existing metabolic network. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109, E2856–2864 (2012). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cusick M. E., Klitgord N., Vidal M. & Hill D. E. Interactome: gateway into systems biology. Hum Mol Genet 14 Spec No. 2, R171–181 (2005). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Rual J. F. et al. Towards a proteome-scale map of the human protein-protein interaction network. Nature 437, 1173–1178 (2005). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Schrattenholz A., Groebe K. & Soskic V. Systems biology approaches and tools for analysis of interactomes and multi-target drugs. Methods Mol Biol 662, 29–58 (2010). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Meyer M. J., Das J., Wang X. & Yu H. INstruct: a database of high-quality 3D structurally resolved protein interactome networks. Bioinformatics 29, 1577–1579 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Stojmirovic A. & Yu Y. K. Information flow in interaction networks. J Comput Biol 14, 1115–1143 (2007). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Mason O. & Verwoerd M. Graph theory and networks in Biology. IET Syst Biol 1, 89–119 (2007). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Christensen C., Thakar J. & Albert R. Systems-level insights into cellular regulation: inferring, analysing, and modelling intracellular networks. IET Syst Biol 1, 61–77 (2007). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Chang X., Xu T., Li Y. & Wang K. Dynamic modular architecture of protein-protein interaction networks beyond the dichotomy of ‘date’ and ‘party’ hubs. Sci Rep 3, 1691 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Rubinov M. & Sporns O. Weight-conserving characterization of complex functional brain networks. Neuroimage 56, 2068–2079 (2011). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Ding S. L. & Rockland K. S. Modular organization of the monkey presubiculum. Exp Brain Res 139, 255–265 (2001). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Valencia M. et al. Complex modular structure of large-scale brain networks. Chaos 19, 023119 (2009). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Song J. & Singh M. From hub proteins to hub modules: the relationship between essentiality and centrality in the yeast interactome at different scales of organization. PLoS Comput Biol 9, e1002910 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Bhatt P. N. & Rodrigues F. M. Chandipura: a new Arbovirus isolated in India from patients with febrile illness. Indian J Med Res 55, 1295–1305 (1967). [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Chadha M. S. et al. An outbreak of Chandipura virus encephalitis in the eastern districts of Gujarat state, India. Am J Trop Med Hyg 73, 566–570 (2005). [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Ghosh S., Dutta K. & Basu A. Chandipura virus induces neuronal death through Fas-mediated extrinsic apoptotic pathway. J Virol 87, 12398–12406 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Tandale B. V. et al. Chandipura virus: a major cause of acute encephalitis in children in North Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, India. J Med Virol 80, 118–124 (2008). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Balakrishnan A. & Mishra A. C. Immune response during acute Chandipura viral infection in experimentally infected susceptible mice. Virol J 5, 121 (2008). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Mavale M. S. et al. Experimental transmission of Chandipura virus by Phlebotomus argentipes (diptera: psychodidae). Am J Trop Med Hyg 76, 307–309 (2007). [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Rubinov M. & Sporns O. Complex network measures of brain connectivity: uses and interpretations. Neuroimage 52, 1059–1069 (2010). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Park H. H. et al. The death domain superfamily in intracellular signaling of apoptosis and inflammation. Annu Rev Immunol 25, 561–586 (2007). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Valmiki M. G. & Ramos J. W. Death effector domain-containing proteins. Cell Mol Life Sci 66, 814–830 (2009). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Pennarun B. et al. Playing the DISC: turning on TRAIL death receptor-mediated apoptosis in cancer. Biochim Biophys Acta 1805, 123–140 (2010). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Kim J. W., Choi E. J. & Joe C. O. Activation of death-inducing signaling complex (DISC) by pro-apoptotic C-terminal fragment of RIP. Oncogene 19, 4491–4499 (2000). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Tan B. M. et al. Baculoviral inhibitors of apoptosis repeat containing (BIRC) proteins fine-tune TNF-induced nuclear factor kappaB and c-Jun N-terminal kinase signalling in mouse pancreatic beta cells. Diabetologia 56, 520–532 (2013). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Wang Y. et al. Gene network revealed involvements of Birc2, Birc3 and Tnfrsf1a in anti-apoptosis of injured peripheral nerves. PLoS One 7, e43436 (2012). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Nordstrom E. A. et al. A human-specific role of cell death-inducing DFFA (DNA fragmentation factor-alpha)-like effector A (CIDEA) in adipocyte lipolysis and obesity. Diabetes 54, 1726–1734 (2005). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Harms C. et al. Neuronal gelsolin prevents apoptosis by enhancing actin depolymerization. Mol Cell Neurosci 25, 69–82 (2004). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Holub J. L., Qiu Y. Y., Chu F. & Madonna M. B. The role of nerve growth factor in caspase-dependent apoptosis in human BE(2)C neuroblastoma. J Pediatr Surg 46, 1191–1196 (2011). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Green B. D. et al. Akt1 is the principal Akt isoform regulating apoptosis in limiting cytokine concentrations. Cell Death Differ 20, 1341–1349 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Fiers W. et al. TNF-induced intracellular signaling leading to gene induction or to cytotoxicity by necrosis or by apoptosis. J Inflamm 47, 67–75 (1995). [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Rath P. C. & Aggarwal B. B. TNF-induced signaling in apoptosis. J Clin Immunol 19, 350–364 (1999). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Kast R. E. & Altschuler E. L. Anti-apoptosis function of TNF-alpha in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: lessons from Crohn’s disease and the therapeutic potential of bupropion to lower TNF-alpha. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz) 53, 143–147 (2005). [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Seifert J. K. et al. Large volume hepatic freezing: association with significant release of the cytokines interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor a in a rat model. World J Surg 26, 1333–1341 (2002). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Chang H. Y. et al. Activation of apoptosis signal-regulating kinase 1 (ASK1) by the adapter protein Daxx. Science 281, 1860–1863 (1998). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Hatai T. et al. Execution of apoptosis signal-regulating kinase 1 (ASK1)-induced apoptosis by the mitochondria-dependent caspase activation. J Biol Chem 275, 26576–26581 (2000). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. von Mering C. et al. STRING: a database of predicted functional associations between proteins. Nucleic Acids Res 31, 258–261 (2003). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Franceschini A. et al. STRING v9.1: protein-protein interaction networks, with increased coverage and integration. Nucleic Acids Res 41, D808–815 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Dai D. & Huiguang H. VisualConnectome: Toolbox for brain network visualization and analysis (Abstract). Human Brain Mapping (2011). [Google Scholar]
  41. Pereira T. et al. Connectivity-driven coherence in complex networks. Phys Rev Lett 110, 234103 (2013). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Newman M. E. Modularity and community structure in networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103, 8577–8582 (2006). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Wernisch L., Hunting M. & Wodak S. J. Identification of structural domains in proteins by a graph heuristic. Proteins 35, 338–352 (1999). [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Scientific Reports are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES