Gene regulatory networks on transfer entropy (GRNTE): a novel approach to reconstruct gene regulatory interactions applied to a case study for the plant pathogen Phytophthora infestans.
Biological networks
Entropy
Gene regulation
Information theory
Transcription factors
Journal
Theoretical biology & medical modelling
ISSN: 1742-4682
Titre abrégé: Theor Biol Med Model
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101224383
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 04 2019
09 04 2019
Historique:
received:
20
08
2018
accepted:
07
03
2019
entrez:
10
4
2019
pubmed:
10
4
2019
medline:
3
8
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The increasing amounts of genomics data have helped in the understanding of the molecular dynamics of complex systems such as plant and animal diseases. However, transcriptional regulation, although playing a central role in the decision-making process of cellular systems, is still poorly understood. In this study, we linked expression data with mathematical models to infer gene regulatory networks (GRN). We present a simple yet effective method to estimate transcription factors' GRNs from transcriptional data. We defined interactions between pairs of genes (edges in the GRN) as the partial mutual information between these genes that takes into account time and possible lags in time from one gene in relation to another. We call this method Gene Regulatory Networks on Transfer Entropy (GRNTE) and it corresponds to Granger causality for Gaussian variables in an autoregressive model. To evaluate the reconstruction accuracy of our method, we generated several sub-networks from the GRN of the eukaryotic yeast model, Saccharomyces cerevisae. Then, we applied this method using experimental data of the plant pathogen Phytophthora infestans. We evaluated the transcriptional expression levels of 48 transcription factors of P. infestans during its interaction with one moderately resistant and one susceptible cultivar of yellow potato (Solanum tuberosum group Phureja), using RT-qPCR. With these data, we reconstructed the regulatory network of P. infestans during its interaction with these hosts. We first evaluated the performance of our method, based on the transfer entropy (GRNTE), on eukaryotic datasets from the GRNs of the yeast S. cerevisae. Results suggest that GRNTE is comparable with the state-of-the-art methods when the parameters for edge detection are properly tuned. In the case of P. infestans, most of the genes considered in this study, showed a significant change in expression from the onset of the interaction (0 h post inoculum - hpi) to the later time-points post inoculation. Hierarchical clustering of the expression data discriminated two distinct periods during the infection: from 12 to 36 hpi and from 48 to 72 hpi for both the moderately resistant and susceptible cultivars. These distinct periods could be associated with two phases of the life cycle of the pathogen when infecting the host plant: the biotrophic and necrotrophic phases. Here we presented an algorithmic solution to the problem of network reconstruction in time series data. This analytical perspective makes use of the dynamic nature of time series data as it relates to intrinsically dynamic processes such as transcription regulation, were multiple elements of the cell (e.g., transcription factors) act simultaneously and change over time. We applied the algorithm to study the regulatory network of P. infestans during its interaction with two hosts which differ in their level of resistance to the pathogen. Although the gene expression analysis did not show differences between the two hosts, the results of the GRN analyses evidenced rewiring of the genes' interactions according to the resistance level of the host. This suggests that different regulatory processes are activated in response to different environmental cues. Applications of our methodology showed that it could reliably predict where to place edges in the transcriptional networks and sub-networks. The experimental approach used here can help provide insights on the biological role of these interactions on complex processes such as pathogenicity. The code used is available at https://github.com/jccastrog/GRNTE under GNU general public license 3.0.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The increasing amounts of genomics data have helped in the understanding of the molecular dynamics of complex systems such as plant and animal diseases. However, transcriptional regulation, although playing a central role in the decision-making process of cellular systems, is still poorly understood. In this study, we linked expression data with mathematical models to infer gene regulatory networks (GRN). We present a simple yet effective method to estimate transcription factors' GRNs from transcriptional data.
METHOD
We defined interactions between pairs of genes (edges in the GRN) as the partial mutual information between these genes that takes into account time and possible lags in time from one gene in relation to another. We call this method Gene Regulatory Networks on Transfer Entropy (GRNTE) and it corresponds to Granger causality for Gaussian variables in an autoregressive model. To evaluate the reconstruction accuracy of our method, we generated several sub-networks from the GRN of the eukaryotic yeast model, Saccharomyces cerevisae. Then, we applied this method using experimental data of the plant pathogen Phytophthora infestans. We evaluated the transcriptional expression levels of 48 transcription factors of P. infestans during its interaction with one moderately resistant and one susceptible cultivar of yellow potato (Solanum tuberosum group Phureja), using RT-qPCR. With these data, we reconstructed the regulatory network of P. infestans during its interaction with these hosts.
RESULTS
We first evaluated the performance of our method, based on the transfer entropy (GRNTE), on eukaryotic datasets from the GRNs of the yeast S. cerevisae. Results suggest that GRNTE is comparable with the state-of-the-art methods when the parameters for edge detection are properly tuned. In the case of P. infestans, most of the genes considered in this study, showed a significant change in expression from the onset of the interaction (0 h post inoculum - hpi) to the later time-points post inoculation. Hierarchical clustering of the expression data discriminated two distinct periods during the infection: from 12 to 36 hpi and from 48 to 72 hpi for both the moderately resistant and susceptible cultivars. These distinct periods could be associated with two phases of the life cycle of the pathogen when infecting the host plant: the biotrophic and necrotrophic phases.
CONCLUSIONS
Here we presented an algorithmic solution to the problem of network reconstruction in time series data. This analytical perspective makes use of the dynamic nature of time series data as it relates to intrinsically dynamic processes such as transcription regulation, were multiple elements of the cell (e.g., transcription factors) act simultaneously and change over time. We applied the algorithm to study the regulatory network of P. infestans during its interaction with two hosts which differ in their level of resistance to the pathogen. Although the gene expression analysis did not show differences between the two hosts, the results of the GRN analyses evidenced rewiring of the genes' interactions according to the resistance level of the host. This suggests that different regulatory processes are activated in response to different environmental cues. Applications of our methodology showed that it could reliably predict where to place edges in the transcriptional networks and sub-networks. The experimental approach used here can help provide insights on the biological role of these interactions on complex processes such as pathogenicity. The code used is available at https://github.com/jccastrog/GRNTE under GNU general public license 3.0.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30961611
doi: 10.1186/s12976-019-0103-7
pii: 10.1186/s12976-019-0103-7
pmc: PMC6454757
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Pagination
7Références
Phys Rev Lett. 2000 Jul 10;85(2):461-4
pubmed: 10991308
Nature. 2001 Mar 8;410(6825):268-76
pubmed: 11258382
Nucleic Acids Res. 2001 May 1;29(9):e45
pubmed: 11328886
Nat Genet. 2002 May;31(1):60-3
pubmed: 11967534
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Jun 11;99(12):7821-6
pubmed: 12060727
Science. 2002 Oct 25;298(5594):799-804
pubmed: 12399584
Fungal Genet Biol. 2003 Oct;40(1):4-14
pubmed: 12948509
Bioinformatics. 2003 Oct;19 Suppl 2:ii122-9
pubmed: 14534181
Nat Rev Genet. 2004 Feb;5(2):101-13
pubmed: 14735121
Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2004 Jun;14(3):283-91
pubmed: 15193307
Nature. 2004 Sep 16;431(7006):308-12
pubmed: 15372033
Nat Biotechnol. 2005 Jan;23(1):137-44
pubmed: 15637633
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Apr 5;102(14):4935
pubmed: 15809445
J Mol Endocrinol. 2005 Jun;34(3):597-601
pubmed: 15956331
IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 2005 Aug;27(8):1226-38
pubmed: 16119262
Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2006;44:41-60
pubmed: 16448329
BMC Bioinformatics. 2006 Mar 20;7 Suppl 1:S7
pubmed: 16723010
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Jun 6;103(23):8577-82
pubmed: 16723398
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Oct 3;103(40):14724-31
pubmed: 17003135
Nat Genet. 2007 May;39(5):683-7
pubmed: 17417638
Phys Rev Lett. 2007 Nov 16;99(20):204101
pubmed: 18233144
Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2008 Apr;21(4):433-47
pubmed: 18321189
Mol Plant Pathol. 2008 May;9(3):385-402
pubmed: 18705878
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Oct 21;105(42):16290-5
pubmed: 18852452
BMC Bioinformatics. 2008 Nov 01;9:465
pubmed: 18976492
Nat Rev Genet. 2009 Jan;10(1):57-63
pubmed: 19015660
Phytopathology. 2009 Jan;99(1):82-8
pubmed: 19055438
J Theor Biol. 2009 Apr 7;257(3):419-29
pubmed: 19121637
J Comput Biol. 2009 Feb;16(2):229-39
pubmed: 19183003
Science. 2009 Jul 24;325(5939):429-32
pubmed: 19628860
Nature. 2009 Sep 17;461(7262):393-8
pubmed: 19741609
Plant J. 2010 May;62(3):357-66
pubmed: 20128886
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Apr 6;107(14):6286-91
pubmed: 20308593
BMC Bioinformatics. 2010 Mar 25;11:154
pubmed: 20338053
Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2009 Nov;80(5 Pt 2):056117
pubmed: 20365053
Phys Rev Lett. 2009 Dec 4;103(23):238701
pubmed: 20366183
Plant Signal Behav. 2010 Jun;5(6):769-72
pubmed: 20400849
PLoS One. 2010 Sep 28;5(9):null
pubmed: 20927193
PLoS One. 2011 Apr 06;6(4):e16835
pubmed: 21494330
Bioinformatics. 2011 Aug 15;27(16):2263-70
pubmed: 21697125
PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e31526
pubmed: 22328937
PLoS One. 2012;7(6):e40246
pubmed: 22768262
Nat Methods. 2012 Jul 15;9(8):796-804
pubmed: 22796662
Eukaryot Cell. 2012 Nov;11(11):1304-12
pubmed: 22923046
Rev Iberoam Micol. 2013 Apr-Jun;30(2):81-7
pubmed: 23036748
PLoS Pathog. 2012;8(10):e1002940
pubmed: 23055926
BMC Syst Biol. 2012 Nov 22;6:145
pubmed: 23173819
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Mar 4;111(9):3354-9
pubmed: 24550517
Genes (Basel). 2011 Oct 13;2(4):689-705
pubmed: 24710287
PLoS One. 2014 Nov 06;9(11):e111841
pubmed: 25375671
Sci Rep. 2015 Mar 02;5:8665
pubmed: 25727453
Comput Math Methods Med. 2015;2015:347273
pubmed: 26576197
IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform. 2016 Mar-Apr;13(2):301-14
pubmed: 27045829
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 Feb 27;115(9):2252-2257
pubmed: 29440433
Sci Rep. 2018 Feb 21;8(1):3384
pubmed: 29467401