Gene network inference using continuous time Bayesian networks: a comparative study and application to Th17 cell differentiation

BMC Bioinformatics

Enzo Acerbi²  Teresa Zelante¹  Vipin Narang¹  Fabio Stella³ 

[1] Singapore Immunology Network (SIgN), A*STAR, 8A Biomedical Grove, Immunos Building, Level 4 138648, Singapore

[2] School of Translational and Molecular Medicine (DIMET), University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy

[3] Department of Informatics, Systems and Communication, University of Milano-Bicocca, Viale Sarca 336, Building U14, Milan 20126, Italy

关键词: Continuous time Bayesian network;    Time course;    Gene network reconstruction;   

Others  :  1084456
DOI  :  10.1186/s12859-014-0387-x

 received in 2014-07-11, accepted in 2014-11-17,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Dynamic aspects of gene regulatory networks are typically investigated by measuring system variables at multiple time points. Current state-of-the-art computational approaches for reconstructing gene networks directly build on such data, making a strong assumption that the system evolves in a synchronous fashion at fixed points in time. However, nowadays omics data are being generated with increasing time course granularity. Thus, modellers now have the possibility to represent the system as evolving in continuous time and to improve the models’ expressiveness.

Results

Continuous time Bayesian networks are proposed as a new approach for gene network reconstruction from time course expression data. Their performance was compared to two state-of-the-art methods: dynamic Bayesian networks and Granger causality analysis. On simulated data, the methods comparison was carried out for networks of increasing size, for measurements taken at different time granularity densities and for measurements unevenly spaced over time. Continuous time Bayesian networks outperformed the other methods in terms of the accuracy of regulatory interactions learnt from data for all network sizes. Furthermore, their performance degraded smoothly as the size of the network increased. Continuous time Bayesian networks were significantly better than dynamic Bayesian networks for all time granularities tested and better than Granger causality for dense time series. Both continuous time Bayesian networks and Granger causality performed robustly for unevenly spaced time series, with no significant loss of performance compared to the evenly spaced case, while the same did not hold true for dynamic Bayesian networks. The comparison included the IRMA experimental datasets which confirmed the effectiveness of the proposed method. Continuous time Bayesian networks were then applied to elucidate the regulatory mechanisms controlling murine T helper 17 (Th17) cell differentiation and were found to be effective in discovering well-known regulatory mechanisms, as well as new plausible biological insights.

Conclusions

Continuous time Bayesian networks were effective on networks of both small and large size and were particularly feasible when the measurements were not evenly distributed over time. Reconstruction of the murine Th17 cell differentiation network using continuous time Bayesian networks revealed several autocrine loops, suggesting that Th17 cells may be auto regulating their own differentiation process.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Acerbi et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

Figure 8.

Figure 9.

Figure 10.

Figure 11.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Sima C, Hua J, Jung S: Inference of gene regulatory networks using time-series data: a survey. Curr Genom 2009, 10(6):416.
• [2]He F, Balling R, Zeng A-P: Reverse engineering and verification of gene networks: principles, assumptions, and limitations of present methods and future perspectives. J Biotechnol 2009, 144(3):190-203.
• [3]Grigorov MG: Analysis of time course omics datasets. In Bioinformatics for Omics Data: Springer; 2011:153–172.
• [4]Lähdesmäki H, Shmulevich I, Yli-Harja O: On learning gene regulatory networks under the boolean network model. Mach Learn 2003, 52(1–2):147-167.
• [5]Friedman N, Linial M, Nachman I, Pe’er D: Using bayesian networks to analyze expression data. J Comput Biol 2000, 7(3–4):601-620.
• [6]Zhu J, Wiener MC, Zhang C, Fridman A, Minch E, Lum PY, Sachs JR, Schadt EE: Increasing the power to detect causal associations by combining genotypic and expression data in segregating populations. PLoS Comput Biol 2007, 3(4):69.
• [7]Sachs K, Perez O, Pe’er D, Lauffenburger DA, Nolan GP: Causal protein-signaling networks derived from multiparameter single-cell data. Science 2005, 308(5721):523-529.
• [8]Dean T, Kanazawa K: A model for reasoning about persistence and causation. Comput Intell 1989, 5(2):142-150.
• [9]Hirose O, Yoshida R, Imoto S, Yamaguchi R, Higuchi T, Charnock-Jones DS, Miyano S: Statistical inference of transcriptional module-based gene networks from time course gene expression profiles by using state space models. Bioinformatics 2008, 24(7):932-942.
• [10]Shmulevich I, Dougherty ER, Kim S, Zhang W: Probabilistic boolean networks: a rule-based uncertainty model for gene regulatory networks. Bioinformatics 2002, 18(2):261-274.
• [11]Li P, Zhang C, Perkins EJ, Gong P, Deng Y: Comparison of probabilistic boolean network and dynamic bayesian network approaches for inferring gene regulatory networks. BMC bioinformatics 2007, 8(Suppl 7):13. BioMed Central Full Text
• [12]De Jong H: Modeling and simulation of genetic regulatory systems: a literature review. J Comput Biol 2002, 9(1):67-103.
• [13]Bansal M, Della Gatta G, Di Bernardo D: Inference of gene regulatory networks and compound mode of action from time course gene expression profiles. Bioinformatics 2006, 22(7):815-822.
• [14]Margolin AA, Nemenman I, Basso K, Wiggins C, Stolovitzky G, Favera RD, Califano A: Aracne: an algorithm for the reconstruction of gene regulatory networks in a mammalian cellular context. BMC Bioinformatics 2006, 7(Suppl 1):7. BioMed Central Full Text
• [15]Basso K, Margolin AA, Stolovitzky G, Klein U, Dalla-Favera R, Califano A: Reverse engineering of regulatory networks in human b cells. Nat Genet 2005, 37(4):382-390.
• [16]Sîrbu A, Ruskin HJ, Crane M: Comparison of evolutionary algorithms in gene regulatory network model inference. BMC Bioinformatics 2010, 11(1):59. BioMed Central Full Text
• [17]Granger CW: Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica: J Econometric Soc1969:424–438.
• [18]Ding M, Chen Y, Bressler SL: Granger causality: basic theory and application to neuroscience. In Handbook of time series analysis: John Wiley & Sons; 2006:437–460.
• [19]Acerbi E, Decraene J, Gouaillard A: Computational reconstruction of biochemical networks. In Information Fusion (FUSION), 2012 15th International Conference . IEEE, New York, NY, USA; 2012:1134-1141.
• [20]Karlebach G, Shamir R: Modelling and analysis of gene regulatory networks. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2008, 9(10):770-780.
• [21]Feist AM, Herrgård MJ, Thiele I, Reed JL, Palsson BØ: Reconstruction of biochemical networks in microorganisms. Nat Rev Microbiol 2008, 7(2):129-143.
• [22]Bansal M, Belcastro V, Ambesi-Impiombato A, Di Bernardo D: How to infer gene networks from expression profiles. Mol Syst Biol2007, 3(1).
• [23]Marbach D, Costello JC, Küffner R, Vega NM, Prill RJ, Camacho DM, Allison KR, Kellis M, Collins JJ, Stolovitzky G: Wisdom of crowds for robust gene network inference. Nat Med 2012, 9(8):796-804.
• [24]Ryu K: Analysis of a continuous-time proportional hazard model using discrete duration data. Economet Rev 1995, 14(3):299-313.
• [25]Nodelman U, Shelton CR, Koller D: Continuous time bayesian networks. In Proc. of the 18th Conf. on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.; 2002:378–387.
• [26]Thieffry D, Huerta AM, Pérez-Rueda E, Collado-Vides J: From specific gene regulation to genomic networks: a global analysis of transcriptional regulation in escherichia coli. Bioessays 1998, 20(5):433-440.
• [27]Friedman N: Inferring cellular networks using probabilistic graphical models. Science 2004, 303(5659):799-805.
• [28]Zou C, Feng J: Granger causality vs. dynamic bayesian network inference: a comparative study. BMC Bioinformatics 2009, 10(1):122. BioMed Central Full Text
• [29]Cantone I, Marucci L, Iorio F, Ricci MA, Belcastro V, Bansal M, Santini S, di Bernardo M, di Bernardo D, Cosma MP: A yeast synthetic network for in vivo assessment of reverse-engineering and modeling approaches. Cell 2009, 137(1):172-181.
• [30]Nielsen TD, JENSEN FV: Bayesian Networks and Decision Graphs; 2009.
• [31]Koller D, Friedman N: Probabilistic Graphical Models: Principles and Techniques . MIT press, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142; 2009.
• [32]Schwarz G: Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann Stat 1978, 6(2):461-464.
• [33]Liang S, Fuhrman S, Somogyi R: Reveal, a general reverse engineering algorithm for inference of genetic network architectures. In Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing; 1998:18–29.
• [34]Koski TJ, Noble J: A review of bayesian networks and structure learning. Mathematica Applicanda 2012, 40(1):51-103.
• [35]Xu J, Shelton CR: Continuous time bayesian networks for host level network intrusion detection. Mach Learn Knowl Discov Databases2008:613–627.
• [36]Boudali H, Bechta Dugan J: A continuous-time bayesian network reliability modeling, and analysis framework. IEEE Trans Reliability 2006, 55(1):86-97.
• [37]Fan Y, Shelton CR: Learning continuous-time social network dynamics. In Proc. of the 25th Conf. on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence: AUAI Press; 2009:161–168.
• [38]Gatti E, Luciani D, Stella F: A continuous time bayesian network model for cardiogenic heart failure. Flex Serv Manuf J2011:1–20.
• [39]Villa S, Stella F: A continuous time bayesian network classifier for intraday fx prediction. Quant Finance2014:1–14.
• [40]Acerbi E, Stella F: Continuous time bayesian networks for gene network reconstruction: a comparative study on time course data. In 10th International Symposium on Bioinformatics Research and Applications: Springer; 2014,8492(1):176–187.
• [41]Nodelman U, Shelton CR, Koller D: Learning continuous time bayesian networks. In Proc. of the 19th Conf. on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.; 2002:451–458.
• [42]Geweke JF: Measures of conditional linear dependence and feedback between time series. J Am Stat Assoc 1984, 79(388):907-915.
• [43][http://www.uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/130403.pdf] webcite Kwok S: A nonparametric test of granger causality in continuous time. Cornell University2012. .
• [44]McCrorie JR, Chambers MJ: Granger causality and the sampling of economic processes. J Econometrics 2006, 132(2):311-336.
• [45]Hiemstra C, Jones JD: Testing for linear and nonlinear granger causality in the stock price-volume relation. J Finance 1994, 49(5):1639-1664.
• [46]Diks C, Panchenko V: A new statistic and practical guidelines for nonparametric granger causality testing. J Econ Dynam Contr 2006, 30(9):1647-1669.
• [47]Ancona N, Marinazzo D, Stramaglia S: Radial basis function approach to nonlinear granger causality of time series. Phys Rev E 2004, 70(5):056221.
• [48]Marinazzo D, Liao W, Chen H, Stramaglia S: Nonlinear connectivity by granger causality. Neuroimage 2011, 58(2):330-338.
• [49]Roberts DL, Nord S: Causality tests and functional form sensitivity. Appl Econ 1985, 17(1):135-141.
• [50]Barnett L, Barrett AB, Seth AK: Granger causality and transfer entropy are equivalent for gaussian variables. Phys Rev Lett 2009, 103(23):238701.
• [51]Stolovitzky G, Monroe D, Califano A: Dialogue on reverse-engineering assessment and methods. Ann New York Acad Sci 2007, 1115(1):1-22.
• [52]Gama-Castro S, Jiménez-Jacinto V, Peralta-Gil M, Santos-Zavaleta A, Peñaloza-Spinola MI, Contreras-Moreira B, Segura-Salazar J, Muñiz-Rascado L, Martínez-Flores I, Salgado H, Bonavides-Martínez C, Abreu-Goodger C, Rodríguez-Penagos C, Miranda-Ríos J, Morett E, Merino E, Huerta AM, Treviño-Quintanilla L, Collado-Vides J: Regulondb (version 6.0): gene regulation model of escherichia coli k-12 beyond transcription, active (experimental) annotated promoters and textpresso navigation. Nucleic Acids Res 2008, 36(suppl 1):120-124.
• [53]Marbach D, Schaffter T, Mattiussi C, Floreano D: Generating realistic in silico gene networks for performance assessment of reverse engineering methods. J Comput Biol 2009, 16(2):229-239.
• [54]Littman DR, Rudensky AY: Th17 and regulatory t cells in mediating and restraining inflammation. Cell 2010, 140(6):845-858.
• [55]Yosef N, Shalek AK, Gaublomme JT, Jin H, Lee Y, Awasthi A, Wu C, Karwacz K, Xiao S, Jorgolli M, Gennert D, Satija R, Shakya A, Lu DY, Trombetta JJ, Pillai MR, Ratcliffe PJ, Coleman ML, Bix M, Tantin D, Park H, Kuchro VK, Regev A: Dynamic regulatory network controlling th17 cell differentiation. Nature 2013, 496(7446):461-468.
• [56]Wu C, Yosef N, Thalhamer T, Zhu C, Xiao S, Kishi Y, Regev A, Kuchroo VK: Induction of pathogenic th17 cells by inducible salt-sensing kinase sgk1. Nature 2013, 496(7446):513-517.
• [57]Kleinewietfeld M, Manzel A, Titze J, Kvakan H, Yosef N, Linker RA, Muller DN, Hafler DA: Sodium chloride drives autoimmune disease by the induction of pathogenic th17 cells. Nature 2013, 496(7446):518-522.
• [58]Ciofani M, Madar A, Galan C, Sellars M, Mace K, Pauli F, Agarwal A, Huang W, Parkurst CN, Muratet M, Newberry KM, Meadows S, Greenfield A, Yang Y, Jain P, Kirigin FK, Birchmeier C, Wagner EF, Murphy KM, Myers RM, Bonneau R, Littman DR: A validated regulatory network for th17 cell specification. Cell 2012, 151(2):289-303.
• [59]Hayashi K, Altman A: Filamin a is required for t cell activation mediated by protein kinase c- θ. J Immunol 2006, 177(3):1721-1728.
• [60]Ge B, Li O, Wilder P, Rizzino A, McKeithan TW: Nf- κ b regulates bcl3 transcription in t lymphocytes through an intronic enhancer. J Immunol 2003, 171(8):4210-4218.
• [61]Michailidis G, d’Alché-Buc F: Autoregressive models for gene regulatory network inference: sparsity, stability and causality issues. Math Biosci 2013, 246(2):326-334.
• [62]Barabási A-L, Albert R: Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 1999, 286(5439):509-512.
• [63]Wallis SK, Cooney LA, Endres JL, Lee MJ, Ryu J, Somers EC, Fox DA: A polymorphism in the interleukin-4 receptor affects the ability of interleukin-4 to regulate th17 cells: a possible immunoregulatory mechanism for genetic control of the severity of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Res Ther 2011, 13(1):15. BioMed Central Full Text
• [64]van Hamburg JP, De Bruijn MJ, de Almeida CR, van Zwam M, van Meurs M, de Haas E, Boon L, Samsom JN: Enforced expression of gata3 allows differentiation of il-17-producing cells, but constrains th17-mediated pathology. Eur J Immunol 2008, 38(9):2573-2586.
• [65]Bala S, Tang A, Catalano D, Petrasek J, Taha O, Kodys K, Szabo G: Induction of bcl-3 by acute binge alcohol results in toll-like receptor 4/lps tolerance. J Leukoc Biol 2012, 92(3):611-620.
• [66]Ruan Q, Zheng S-J, Palmer S, Carmody RJ, Chen YH: Roles of bcl-3 in the pathogenesis of murine type 1 diabetes. Diabetes 2010, 59(10):2549-2557.
• [67]Komatsu N, Okamoto K, Sawa S, Nakashima T, Oh-hora M, Kodama T, Tanaka S, Bluestone JA, Takayanagi H: Pathogenic conversion of foxp3+ t cells into th17 cells in autoimmune arthritis. Nat Med 2014, 20(1):62-68.
• [68]Stoeckle C, Gouttefangeas C, Hammer M, Weber E, Melms A, Tolosa E: Cathepsin w expressed exclusively in cd8+ t cells and NK cells, is secreted during target cell killing but is not essential for cytotoxicity in human ctls. Exp Hematol 2009, 37(2):266-275.
• [69]Wang Z-X, Teh CH-L, Chan CM-Y, Chu C, Rossbach M, Kunarso G, Allapitchay TB, Wong KY, Stanton LW: The transcription factor zfp281 controls embryonic stem cell pluripotency by direct activation and repression of target genes. Stem Cells 2008, 26(11):2791-2799.
• [70]Lexberg MH, Taubner A, Albrecht I, Lepenies I, Richter A, Kamradt T, Radbruch A, Chang H-D: Ifn- γ and il-12 synergize to convert in vivo generated th17 into th1/th17 cells. Eur J Immunol 2010, 40(11):3017-3027.
• [71]Bending D, Newland S, Krejċí A, Phillips JM, Bray S: Epigenetic changes at il12rb2 and tbx21 in relation to plasticity behavior of th17 cells. J Immunol 2011, 186(6):3373-3382.
• [72]Toh M-L, Kawashima M, Hot A, Miossec P, Miossec P: Role of il-17 in the th1 systemic defects in rheumatoid arthritis through selective il-12r β 2 inhibition. Ann Rheum Dis 2010, 69(8):1562-1567.
• [73]Russell SE, Moore AC, Fallon PG, Walsh PT: Soluble il-2r α (scd25) exacerbates autoimmunity and enhances the development of th17 responses in mice. PloS one 2012, 7(10):47748.
• [74]Shan M, Yuan X, Song L-z, Roberts L, Zarinkamar N, Seryshev A, Zhang Y, Hilsenbeck S, Chang S-H, Dong C, Corry DB, Kheradmand F: Cigarette smoke induction of osteopontin (spp1) mediates th17 inflammation in human and experimental emphysema. Sci Transl Med 2012, 4(117):117-91179.
• [75]Male V, Nisoli I, Kostrzewski T, Allan DS, Carlyle JR, Lord GM, Wack A, Brady HJ: The transcription factor e4bp4/nfil3 controls commitment to the nk lineage and directly regulates eomes and id2 expression. J Exp Med 2014, 211(4):635-642.
• [76]Yu X, Rollins D, Ruhn KA, Stubblefield JJ, Green CB, Kashiwada M, Rothman PB, Takahashi JS, Hooper LV: Th17 cell differentiation is regulated by the circadian clock. Science 2013, 342(6159):727-730.
• [77]Mondal A, Sawant D, Dent AL: Transcriptional repressor bcl6 controls th17 responses by controlling gene expression in both t cells and macrophages. J Immunol 2010, 184(8):4123-4132.
• [78]Maruyama T, Li J, Vaque JP, Konkel JE, Wang W, Zhang B, Zhang P, Zamarron BF, Yu D, Wu Y, Zhuang Y, Gutkind JS, Chen WJ: Control of the differentiation of regulatory t cells and th17 cells by the dna-binding inhibitor id3. Nat Immunol 2011, 12(1):86-95.
• [79]Lin Y-Y, Jones-Mason ME, Inoue M, Lasorella A, Iavarone A, Li Q-J, Shinohara ML, Zhuang Y: Transcriptional regulator id2 is required for the cd4 t cell immune response in the development of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J Immunol 2012, 189(3):1400-1405.
• [80]Salehi S, Bankoti R, Benevides L, Willen J, Couse M, Silva JS, Dhall D, Meffre E, Targan S, Martins GA: B lymphocyte–induced maturation protein-1 contributes to intestinal mucosa homeostasis by limiting the number of il-17–producing cd4+ t cells. J Immunol 2012, 189(12):5682-5693.
• [81]Robinson JW, Hartemink AJ: Non-stationary dynamic bayesian networks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers; 2009:1369–1376.
• [82]Grzegorczyk M, Husmeier D: Non-stationary continuous dynamic bayesian networks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. Edited by Bengio Y; 2009:682–690.
• [83]Dondelinger F, Husmeier D, Lèbre S: Dynamic bayesian networks in molecular plant science: inferring gene regulatory networks from multiple gene expression time series. Euphytica 2012, 183(3):361-377.
• [84]Schaffter T, Marbach D, Floreano D: Genenetweaver: in silico benchmark generation and performance profiling of network inference methods. Bioinformatics 2011, 27(16):2263-2270.
• [85]Balaji S, Babu MM, Iyer LM, Luscombe NM, Aravind L: Comprehensive analysis of combinatorial regulation using the transcriptional regulatory network of yeast. J Mol Biol 2006, 360(1):213-227.
• [86]Hamilton JD, Susmel R: Autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity and changes in regime. J Econometrics 1994, 64(1):307-333.
• [87]Kwiatkowski D, Phillips PC, Schmidt P: Shin Y: Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root: How sure are we that economic time series have a unit root? J Econometrics 1992, 54(1):159-178.
• [88]Murphy K: The bayes net toolbox for matlab. Comput Sci Stat 2001, 33(2):1024-1034.
• [89]Seth AK: A matlab toolbox for granger causal connectivity analysis. J Neurosci Methods 2010, 186(2):262.