Professional Documents
Culture Documents
University, Istanbul,
Turkey
Computational Systems Biology Group, Department of Bioengineering, Gebze Institute of Technology, Kocaeli, Turkey
Edited by:
Reinhard Guthke, Leibniz-Institute for
Natural Product Research and
Infection
Biology Hans-Knoell-Institute,
Germany
Reviewed by:
Mirko Trilling,
Heinrich-Heine-University Dsseldorf,
Germany
Sylvia Schleker, Forschungszentrum
Jlich, Germany
*Correspondence:
Saliha Durmus Tekir , Biosystems
Engineering Research Group,
Department of Chemical Engineering,
Bogazii
Istanbul,
Turkey.
e-mail: saliha.durmus@boun.edu.tr
Since ancient times, even in todays modern world, infectious diseases cause lots of
people to die. Infectious organisms, pathogens, cause diseases by physical interactions
with human proteins. A thorough analysis of these interspecies interactions is required
to provide insights about infection strategies of pathogens. Here we analyzed the most
comprehensive available pathogenhuman protein interaction data including 23,435 interactions, targeting 5,210 human proteins.The data were obtained from the newly developed
pathogenhost interaction search tool, PHISTO. This is the rst comprehensive attempt to
get a comparison between bacterial and viral infections. We investigated human proteins
that are targeted by bacteria and viruses to provide an overview of common and special infection strategies used by these pathogen types. We observed that in the human
protein interaction network the proteins targeted by pathogens have higher connectivity
and betweenness centrality values than those proteins not interacting with pathogens.
The preference of interacting with hub and bottleneck proteins is found to be a common
infection strategy of all types of pathogens to manipulate essential mechanisms in human.
Compared to bacteria, viruses tend to interact with human proteins of much higher connectivity and centrality values in the human network. Gene Ontology enrichment analysis of
the human proteins targeted by pathogens indicates crucial clues about the infection mechanisms of bacteria and viruses. As the main infection strategy, bacteria interact with human
proteins that function in immune response to disrupt human defense mechanisms. Indispensable viral strategy, on the other hand, is the manipulation of human cellular processes
in order to use that transcriptional machinery for their own genetic material transcription.
A novel observation about pathogenhuman systems is that the human proteins targeted
by both pathogens are enriched in the regulation of metabolic processes.
Keywords: pathogenhuman proteinprotein interactions, PHISTO, infection strategy, hub, bottleneck, gene
ontology
INTRODUCTION
According to a report of World Health Organization (WHO), more
than 20% of total deaths in the world are due to infectious diseases
(World Health Organization, 2008). Different types of microorganisms (bacteria, fungi, protozoa, and viruses) act as pathogens
for such diseases. The mechanism of infection is based on the
interactions between the proteins of pathogen and host. Thanks to
the developments in high-throughput protein interaction detection methods, it is possible to identify pathogenhost protein
protein interactions (PHIs) at large-scale. Infection strategies have
been studied through intraspecies protein interactions of various
pathogens (Flajolet et al., 2000; McCraith et al., 2000; Rain et al.,
2001; LaCount et al., 2005; Uetz et al., 2006; Calderwood et al.,
2007; Wang et al., 2010) as well as through interspecies protein
interactions between pathogens and human (Filippova et al., 2004;
Mogensen et al., 2006; Uetz et al., 2006; Calderwood et al., 2007;
Knig et al., 2008). Notwithstanding these, a general overview of
infection mechanisms of different types of pathogens is missing
since there has been a lack of interspecies interactome data until
very recent years.
www.frontiersin.org
To obtain degree and betweenness centrality values of pathogentargeted proteins, the human proteinprotein interaction (PPI)
network was constructed by downloading 194,006 interactions
between 13,015 human proteins from BioGRID (Stark et al., 2011),
DIP (Salwinski et al., 2004), IntAct (Kerrien et al., 2012), Mint
Number of strains
Number of PHIs
BACTERIA
41
8,549
2,591
Aeromonas
Bacillus
3,021
940
1,736
Campylobacter
Chlamydia
21
21
Citrobacter
Clostridium
47
10
Corynebacterium
Escherichia
30
14
27
Finegoldia
Francisella
1,338
346
986
Helicobacter
Klebsiella
Legionella
Listeria
Moraxella
Mycoplasma
Neisseria
17
17
10
Pseudomonas
12
Salmonella
Shigella
11
Staphylococcus
12
10
10
Streptococcus
15
12
Vibrio
Yersinia
3,999
1,221
2,120
FUNGI
Candida
Pneumocystis
Radiomyces
PROTOZOA
9
8
Plasmodium
Toxoplasma
VIRUS
209
14,873
820
2,398
80
Adenovirus
13
121
36
Anemia virus
ASFV
Bacteriophage
Coxsackie virus
Dengue virus
Ebola virus
Echo virus
Ectromelia virus
Encephalitis virus
Foamy virus
Hantaan virus
Hendra virus
Hepatitis virus
21
1,573
179
399
Herpesvirus
28
666
141
388
HIV
49
11,435
279
1,601
Inuenza virus
523
27
182
Leukemia virus
10
10
Measles virus
10
4
(Continued)
www.frontiersin.org
Table 1 | Continued
Pathogen
Number of strains
Number of PHIs
Molluscum virus
MPMV
Nipah virus
Nucleopolyhedrovirus
Orf virus
Papillomavirus
14
290
51
128
Parainuenza virus
Parvo virus
Polio virus
Polyomavirus
64
10
45
Puumala virus
Rabies virus
Rhino virus
Rota virus
Sarcoma virus
15
11
SARS
Sendai virus
Seoul virus
SIV
Stomatitis virus
T-lymphotropic virus
38
35
Tula virus
Vaccinia virus
46
20
33
TOTAL
257
23,435
3,419
5,210
RESULTS
PATHOGEN-TARGETED HUMAN PROTEINS
Degree
Betweenness
centrality
P53
347
0.01547
DRA
52
0.00003
coccus, Yersinia
SUMO1
103
0.00366
Bacillus
JUN
122
0.00335
NPM
137
0.00166
ROA1
246
0.00262
UBC9
134
0.00410
Yersinia
IGHG1
57
0.00219
Seoul virus
Herpesvirus
tococcus, Yersinia
RAC1
239
0.00279
HIV
nella, Yersinia
CDC42
232
0.00405
DRB5
Herpesvirus, HIV
LCK
147
0.00202
XRCC6
131
0.00445
KPYM
76
0.00041
ROA2
189
0.00069
P85A
402
0.00914
STAT3
77
0.00133
STAT1
71
0.00104
GBLP
93
0.00265
PARP4
0.00000
RB
149
0.00282
Yersinia
SP1
103
0.00268
Yersinia
TAF1
58
0.00025
Bacillus
CDK2
151
0.00220
Shigella
TF2B
69
0.00020
Bacillus
EP300
123
0.00245
Bacillus
CBP
147
0.00304
Yersinia
TBP
147
0.00241
The targeting pathogenic proteins for each human protein can be obtained from Data Sheets 14 in Supplementary Material.
to justify these global trends, the same analyses was then repeated
with human protein sets excluding the overrepresented pathogens,
i.e., Bacillus, Yersinia, and HIV which target the largest number of
human proteins (Table 1). Similar results are still obtained when
major pathogen groups are eliminated (Figure 4).
interacting with both bacterial and viral pathogens are also important to highlight common infection mechanisms. The rst 20
enriched GO process terms for three-bacteria-targeted-set, threeviruses-targeted-set, and bacteriavirus-targeted set are listed in
Tables 35 to point out the human processes that are attacked by
pathogens.
GO ENRICHMENT ANALYSIS
All enriched GO terms for each human protein set are available in Data Sheets 610 in Supplementary Material for further detailed analyses. Special attention should be paid to the
results of sets of human proteins interacting with three and
more bacterial groups and three and more viral groups for a
comparison between their infection strategies. The human proteins targeted by more pathogen groups reect more specicity
to infection mechanism of the corresponding pathogen (bacteria or virus). The enriched GO terms in human proteins
www.frontiersin.org
DISCUSSION
In this study, we aim to provide a general overview of infection
strategies used by different pathogens based on the comprehensive
PHI data in PHISTO. Although large-scale pathogenhuman protein interaction data have been identied in the last few years, the
data for fungal and protozoan systems are still scarce (Table 1) to
extract signicant conclusions about their infection mechanisms.
On the other hand, interspecies protein interaction networks for
bacterial and viral pathogens with human have been identied,
In recent studies it has been suggested that viral proteins (Calderwood et al., 2007; Dyer et al., 2008; Itzhaki, 2011) and bacterial
proteins (Dyer et al., 2010) have evolved to preferentially interact with hubs and bottlenecks in the human PPI network. The
degree and betweenness centrality distributions of the bacteriatargeted and virus-targeted human protein sets are displayed in
comparison with non-targeted proteins in the human PPI network in Figures 2 and 3. We observe that the degree and centrality
values of human proteins increase with increasing number of targeting bacterial and viral groups, conrming the previous results
with the most comprehensive PHI data. A novel nding by our
comparative analysis is that the increase in degree and centrality
values with increasing number of pathogen groups is much more
pronounced in virus-targeted cases than bacteria-targeted cases
(Figures 2 and 3). Therefore we can conclude that attacking to
hub and bottleneck proteins in the human interaction network is
more specic to viral infections.
In our PHI data, some pathogen groups are overrepresented
with their larger number of reported interactions with human
(Table 1). As most of these large-scale data have been produced
with high-throughput detection methods, which are prone to
experimental biases and errors, it was necessary to check whether
the distributions of degree and centrality values of the pathogentargeted human proteins would be same without the groups with
large number of interacting partners of human proteins (i.e., Bacillus,Yersinia, and HIV). Hence, we performed the above-mentioned
analyses with human protein sets excluding these major pathogen
groups. 1,199 human proteins targeted by only Yersinia strains
were excluded from the bacteria-targeted set, and 1,283 human
proteins targeted by only HIV strains were excluded from the
virus-targeted set to obtain the degree and betweenness centrality values of the remaining human proteins. We also analyzed
the human proteins targeted by bacteria other than Bacillus and
www.frontiersin.org
set).
Go process term
p-Value
1.89E40
Multi-organism process
1.19E27
9.69E10
1.12E17
Biological regulation
2.59E09
1.06E16
4.89E09
1.12E15
6.64E09
4.49E14
4.60E14
6.72E14
1.49E13
GO process term
p-Value
9.64E13
6.64E09
6.64E09
Cell cycle
2.06E13
6.64E09
3.79E13
6.64E09
4.37E13
8.51E13
in symbiotic interaction
Response to host immune response
6.64E09
3.89E12
6.64E09
6.61E12
7.26E12
6.64E09
6.64E09
1.32E11
1.41E11
1.44E11
1.47E11
6.64E09
6.64E09
See Data Sheet 10 in Supplementary Material for the whole list and the human
6.64E09
6.64E09
6.64E09
6.64E09
6.64E09
See Data Sheet 10 in Supplementary Material for the whole list and the human
proteins corresponding to each GO term.
p-Value
1.64E52
Multi-organism process
1.01E47
5.62E47
1.32E42
Biological regulation
2.66E40
4.59E40
6.32E37
2.00E36
4.84E32
7.68E30
3.21E29
1.39E28
1.74E28
1.91E28
7.04E28
1.13E27
1.94E27
2.92E27
5.31E27
Regulation of apoptosis
6.54E27
See Data Sheet 10 in Supplementary Material for the whole list and the human
proteins corresponding to each GO term.
www.frontiersin.org
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Ali Semih Saylrbas for his invaluable contribution
to the development of PHISTO database. The nancial support
for this research was provided by the Research Funds of Bogazii
by TBITAK,
is gratefully acknowledged.
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at
http://www.frontiersin.org/Microbial_Immunology/10.3389/fmicb.
2012.00046/abstract
Data Sheets 14 | Pathogenhuman PHIs.
Data Sheet 1 | Bacteriahuman PHIs.
Data Sheet 2 | Fungihuman PHIs.
Data Sheet 3 | Protozoahuman PHIs.
Data Sheet 4 | Virushuman PHIs.
Data Sheet 5 | Properties of pathogen-targeted set.
Data Sheets 610 | Gene ontology enrichment results.
REFERENCES
Albert, R., Jeong, H., and Barabasi, A.
L. (2000). Error and attack tolerance
of complex networks. Nature 406,
378382.
Alcami, A., and Koszinowski, U.
H. (2000). Viral mechanisms of
immune evasion. Immunol. Today
21, 447455.
Alonso, A., Bottini, N., Bruckner, S.,
Rahmouni, S., Williams, S., Schoenberger, S. P., and Mustelin, T. (2004).
Lck dephosphorylation at Tyr-394
and inhibition of T cell antigen
receptor signaling by Yersinia phosphatase YopH. J. Biol. Chem. 279,
49224928.
Ashburner, M., Ball, C. A., Blake, J. A.,
Botstein, D., Butler, H., Cherry, M.,
Davis, A. P., Dolinski, K., Dwight, S.
S., Eppig, J. T., Harris, M. A., Hill,
D. P., Issel-Tarver, L., Kasarskis, A.,
Lewis, S., Matese, J. C., Richardson,
J. E., Ringwald, M., Rubin, G. M., and
Sherlock, G. (2000). Gene ontology:
tool for the unication of biology.
The Gene Ontology Consortium.
Nat. Genet. 25, 2529.
Barabasi, A. L., and Oltvai, Z. N. (2004).
Network biology: understanding the
cells functional organization. Nat.
Rev. Genet. 5, 101113.
Calderwood, M. A., Venkatesan, K.,
Xing, L., Chase, M. R., Vazquez, A.,
Holthaus,A. M., Ewence,A. E., Li, N.,
Hirozane-Kishikawa, T., Hill, D. E.,
Vidal, M., Kieff, E., and Johannsen, E.
(2007). EpsteinBarr virus and virus
human protein interaction maps.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104,
76067611.
Carrillo, E., Garrido, E., and Gariglio,
P. (2004). Specic in vitro interaction between papillomavirus E2
proteins and TBP-associated factors.
Intervirology 47, 342349.
Ceol, A., Catr Aryamontri, A., Licata,
L., Peluso, D., Briganti, L., Perfetto, L., Castagnoli, L., and Cesareni,
G. (2010). MINT, the molecular
interaction database: 2009 update.
Nucleic Acids Res. 38, D532D539.
Croft, D., OKelly, G., Wu, G., Haw, R.,
Gillespie, M., Matthews, L., Caudy,
M., Garapati, P., Gopinath, G., Jassal,
B., Jupe, S., Kalatskaya, I., Mahajan,
S., May, B., Ndegwa, N., Schmidt, E.,
Shamovsky, V., Yung, C., Birney, E.,
www.frontiersin.org