|
Resolution: standard / high Figure 2.
Modular organization, mean similarity dendrogram and phylogenetic profile. Modular
organization, mean similarity dendrogram and phylogenetic profile of (a-c) cellular rescue, and (d-f) cellular environment functional networks. (a-d) Modular organization extracted with
the network clustering algorithm. Protein interactions are plotted in brown. Modules
are highlighted in white. Proteins within each module have been reorganized to show
those with the greatest intra-modular connectivity - the core proteins - in the center
of the module. (b,e) Mean similarity dendrograms. Branches for each corresponding
module in (a) and (d) are joined at a node plotted at
. Branches terminate at the mean similarity of each module, Wm, giving branch lengths of Wm - in similarity units. Dendrograms related to full modules are in black and those corresponding
to the core components are in red. Those branches statistically significant (P < 0.05) end in a circle. (c,f) Continuous phylogenetic profiles color-coded from dark
blue (maximal homology) to brown (no homology). Columns show the presence or absence
of network nodes in a given organism and rows show the presence or absence of a given
node in all the organism set. Species are arranged in taxonomic groups separated by
white dashed vertical lines: Bacteria (left), Archaea (center), and Eukarya (right)
(see Additional data file 1). The horizontal white dashed lines represent the localization
of modules. A quick look at these figures provides evidence that proteins that are
part of the same module exhibit a loosely correlated degree of conservation, as should
be the case if modules represent some sort of discrete functional unit. This argument
is quantitatively estimated by the branch length in the mean similarity dendrogram
and the corresponding statistical significance.
Poyatos and Hurst Genome Biology 2004 5:R93 doi:10.1186/gb-2004-5-11-r93 |