|
Resolution: standard / high Figure 4.
Intersection of LC and HTP datasets. (a) Datasets were rendered with the Osprey visualization system [65] to show overlap between
indicated LC and HTP datasets. n, number of nodes; i, number of interactions. (b) Coverage in the HTP physical interaction dataset (collated from five major HTP studies:
Uetz et al. [5], Ito et al. [6], Ito et al. [7], Gavin et al. [9], Ho et al. [8]) overlaps strongly with coverage in the LC dataset. Proteins present only in
the LC dataset were labeled first, followed by proteins present only in the individual
HTP datasets. In all plots, a dot represents interaction between proteins on the x- and y-axes. As the networks are undirected, plots are symmetric about the x = y line. Self interactions were removed. (c) Overlap of individual HTP datasets with the LC dataset. Dot plots show all interactions
from each HTP dataset partitioned according to proteins that are present in the LC-PI
dataset (inside the boxed region) and those that are not (outside the boxed region).
'Ito' indicates data from Ito et al. [7] rather than Ito et al. [7]. The protein content is different for each dataset and so ordinates are not
superimposable. The number of overlapping interactions between each HTP dataset and
the LC dataset is shown in parentheses. Note that only a small fraction of interactions
in each boxed region actually overlaps with the LC-PI dataset because of the high
false-negative rate in HTP data. (d) The number of LC interactions in HTP datasets.
Reguly et al. Journal of Biology 2006 5:11 doi:10.1186/jbiol36 |