skip to main content
10.1145/1854776.1854874acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesbcbConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A multi-tier data mining workflow to analyze the age related shift from diglycosylated- to tetra-glycosylated-FSH secretion by the anterior pituitary

Published:02 August 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

FSH is a glycoprotein hormone secreted as two major glycosylation variants by the anterior pituitary, which regulates reproduction in adults. As FSH consists of two functionally significant glycoforms, differentially expressed genes related to FSH biosynthesis in the anterior pituitary can help us to understand implications of changes in their relative abundance at the genomic level. Mapping these kinds of biomarker genes and their corresponding pathways is a key technology for studying the elaboration of FSH variants that affect the reproductive system. In this paper we use a multiple tier data mining work flow to identify FSH biosynthesis-related genes in the anterior pituitary. Our methodology combines different filterbased feature selection mechanisms like Linear Regression (LR), Z-Score statistics and the Biomarker Identifier (BMI). Consequently, we identified differentially expressed genes in response to the synthetic estrogen, diethylstilbestrol (DES), treatment in male rats. As a next step, we performed pathway analysis to identify the most relevant metabolic pathways associated with a set of identified genes in a pathway. Finally, we applied Mutual Information (MI) to calculate the measure of association between differentially expressed genes and several biosynthetic and signaling pathways of interest.

References

  1. Ulloa-Aguirre A., Dias J. A., Bousfield G. R. 2009. Gonadotropins and the importance of glycosylation. In: Walsh G ed. Post translational Modifications of Protein Biopharmaceuticals. Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co, Weinheim, 109--147.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Walton W. J., Nguyen V. T., Butnev V. Y., Singh V., Moore W. T., Bousfield, G. R. 2001. Characterization of human follicle-stimulating hormone isoforms reveals a non-glycosylated β-subunit In addition to the conventional glycosylated β-subunit. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 86, 3675--3685.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Golub T. R. 2001. Genome-wide views of cancer, N Engl J Med1 344, 601--602.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Ramaswamy, S., and Golub, T. R. 2002. DNA microarrays in clinical oncology, Journal of Clinical Oncology. 20, 1932--1941.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Golub, T. R., Slonim, D., Tamayo, P., Huard, C., Gaasenbeek, M., Mesirov, J., Coller, H., Loh, M., Downing, J., Caligiuri, M., Bloomfield, C., and Lender, E. 1999. Molecular classification of cancer: class discovery and class prediction by gene expression monitoring, Science, 286, 531--537.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Quackenbush J., 2002. Microarray data normalization and transformation. Nat Genet. 32, 496--501.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Netzer, M., Millonig, G., Osl, M., Pfeifer, B., Praun, S., Villinger, J., Vogel, W. and Baumgartner, C. 2009. A new ensemble-based algorithm for identifying breath gas marker candidates in liver disease using ion molecule reaction mass spectrometry Bioinformatics, 25, 941--947. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Visvanathan, M., Netzer, M., Seger, M., Adagarla, B. S., Baumgartner, C., Sittampalam, S. and Lushington, G. H. (2009) Oncogenes and pathway identification using filter based approaches between various carcinoma types in lung. International, Journal of Computational Biology and Drug Design, 2, 236--251.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. The Ovary and Placenta, http://www.biog1105-1106.org/demos/105/unit8/ovaryplacenta.html, last access March 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. The Pituitary Gland - Basic Version, http://www.becomehealthynow.com/article2/bodyendocrine/734/, last access March 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. EMBL-EBI, http://www.ebi.ac.uk/microarray-as/ae/, last access March 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Wolfinger, Rd., Gibson, G., Wolfinger, Ed., Bennett L., Hamadeh, H., Bushel, P., Afshari, C., Paules, Rs. 2001. "Assessing Gene Signficance from cDNA Microarray Expression Data via Mixed Models". J Comput boil. 8, 625--637.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Zhou, X., Liu, K., and Wong, S. T. C. 2004. Cancer classification and prediction using logistic regression with Bayesian gene selection, Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 37, 249--259. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Baumgartner, C. and Baumgartner, D. 2006. Biomarker discovery, disease classification, and similarity query processing on high-throughput ms/ms data of inborn errors of metabolism, J. Biomol. Screen, 11, 90--99.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Cheadle, C., Vawter, M. P., Freed, W. J., and Becker, K. G. 2003. Analysis of Microarray Data Using Z Score Transformation, J Mol Diagn, 5, 73--81.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. C. E. Shannon. 2006. A Mathematical Theory of Communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379--423.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Kanehisa, M. and Goto, S. 2000. 'KEGG: kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes', Nucleic Acids Res., 28, 27--30.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Al-Shahrour, F., Diaz-Uriarte, R. and Dopazo, J. 2004. FatiGO: a web tool for finding significant associations of gene ontology terms with groups of genes, Bioinformatics, 20, 578--580. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Ashburner, M., Ball, C. A., Blake, J. A., Botstein, D., Butler, H., Cherry, J. 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 unification of biology', The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat. Genet., 25, 25--29.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Fink, T., Ahnert, S., Radvanyi, F., Stransky, N., Willbrand, K. 2005. Using Mutual information to infer gene-gene interactions from microarray expression series. American Physical Society, APS March Meeting.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. D'haeseleer P, Liang S, Somogyi R, 2000. Genetic network inference: from co-expression clustering to reverse engineering. Bioinformatics 16, 707--726.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Kraskov A, Grassberger P. 2009 MIC: Mutual Information Based Hierarchical Clustering, In: Information Theory and Statistical Learning, Springer USGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Yin, P. and Arita, J. 2002. Proestrous Surge of Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Secretion Inhibits Apoptosis of Anterior Pituitary Cells in Cycling Female Rats. Neuro Endocrinology, 76, 272--282.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    BCB '10: Proceedings of the First ACM International Conference on Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
    August 2010
    705 pages
    ISBN:9781450304382
    DOI:10.1145/1854776

    Copyright © 2010 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 2 August 2010

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate254of885submissions,29%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader