The interplay between microscopic and mesoscopic structures in complex networks

Understanding a complex network's structure holds the key to understanding its function. The physics community has contributed a multitude of methods and analyses to this cross-disciplinary endeavor. Structural features exist on both the microscopic level, resulting from differences between single node properties, and the mesoscopic level resulting from properties shared by groups of nodes. Disentangling the determinants of network structure on these different scales has remained a major, and so far unsolved, challenge. Here we show how multiscale generative probabilistic exponential random graph models combined with efficient, distributive message-passing inference techniques can be used to achieve this separation of scales, leading to improved detection accuracy of latent classes as demonstrated on benchmark problems. It sheds new light on the statistical significance of motif-distributions in neural networks and improves the link-prediction accuracy as exemplified for gene-disease associations in the highly consequential Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man database. © 2011 Reichardt et al.

Gene network and proteomic analyses of cardiac responses to pathological and physiological stress

Background—The molecular mechanisms underlying similarities and differences between physiological and pathological left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) are of intense interest. Most previous work involved targeted analysis of individual signaling pathways or screening of transcriptomic profiles. We developed a network biology approach using genomic and proteomic data to study the molecular patterns that distinguish pathological and physiological LVH. Methods and Results—A network-based analysis using graph theory methods was undertaken on 127 genome-wide expression arrays of in vivo murine LVH. This revealed phenotype-specific pathological and physiological gene coexpression networks. Despite >1650 common genes in the 2 networks, network structure is significantly different. This is largely because of rewiring of genes that are differentially coexpressed in the 2 networks; this novel concept of differential wiring was further validated experimentally. Functional analysis of the rewired network revealed several distinct cellular pathways and gene sets. Deeper exploration was undertaken by targeted proteomic analysis of mitochondrial, myofilament, and extracellular subproteomes in pathological LVH. A notable finding was that mRNA–protein correlation was greater at the cellular pathway level than for individual loci. Conclusions—This first combined gene network and proteomic analysis of LVH reveals novel insights into the integrated pathomechanisms that distinguish pathological versus physiological phenotypes. In particular, we identify differential gene wiring as a major distinguishing feature of these phenotypes. This approach provides a platform for the investigation of potentially novel pathways in LVH and offers a freely accessible protocol (http://sites.google.com/site/cardionetworks) for similar analyses in other cardiovascular diseases.