Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Alternative splicing and protein interaction data sets

Nature Biotechnology volume 31, pages 292–293 (2013)Cite this article

Subjects

To the Editor:

Alternative splicing, which produces several isoforms of the same protein from a single gene, is extremely common in higher eukaryotes. Splicing events often lead to enormous differences among isoforms in their sequences and structures and in the interactions formed. The differences in protein-protein interactions (PPIs) between different isoforms are generally overlooked when data are made publicly available and can lead to both false-positive and false-negative interactions in large-scale data sets. Thus, we advocate here that the isoform-to-isoform interaction be reported when the data are made available, to reflect the isoform-based specificity of interactions.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Ito, T. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 4569–4574 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Uetz, P. et al. Nature 403, 623–627 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Yu, H. et al. Science 322, 104–110 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Arabidopsis Interactome Mapping Consortium. Science 333, 601–607 (2011).

  5. Breitkreutz, B.J. et al. Nucleic Acids Res. 36, D637–D640 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Aranda, B. et al. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, D525–D531 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lareau, L.F., Green, R.E., Bhatnagar, R.S. & Brenner, S.E. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 14, 273–282 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Resch, A. et al. J. Proteome Res. 3, 76–83 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Talavera, D., Vogel, C., Orozco, M., Teichmann, S.A. & de la Cruz, X. PLoS. Comput. Biol. 3, e33 (2007).

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Kim, E., Magen, A. & Ast, G. Nucleic Acids Res. 35, 125–131 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Pan, Q., Shai, O., Lee, L.J., Frey, B.J. & Blencowe, B.J. Nat. Genet. 40, 1413–1415 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Wang, E.T. et al. Nature 456, 470–476 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Valenzuela, A., Talavera, D., Orozco, M. & de la Cruz, X. J. Mol. Biol. 335, 495–502 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Tress, M.L., Bodenmiller, B., Aebersold, R. & Valencia, A. Genome Biol. 9, R162 (2008).

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Bossi, A. & Lehner, B. Mol. Syst. Biol. 5, 260 (2009).

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Emig, D. & Albrecht, M. J. Proteome Res. 10, 1893–1903 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Emig, D., Kacprowski, T. & Albrecht, M. EURASIP J. Bioinform. Syst. Biol. 2011, 5 (2011).

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Emig, D. et al. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, W755–W762 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Stelzl, U. et al. Cell 122, 957–968 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Boxem, M. et al. Cell 134, 534–545 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Fields, S. & Song, O. Nature 340, 245–246 (1989).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Rigaut, G. et al. Nat. Biotechnol. 17, 1030–1032 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Deeds, E.J., Ashenberg, O., Gerardin, J. & Shakhnovich, E.I. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104, 14952–14957 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank X. de la Cruz for comments on the manuscript. This work is supported by Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council grant BB/F013337/1.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

    David Talavera, David L Robertson & Simon C Lovell

Authors
  1. David Talavera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David L Robertson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Simon C Lovell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simon C Lovell.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Talavera, D., Robertson, D. & Lovell, S. Alternative splicing and protein interaction data sets. Nat Biotechnol 31, 292–293 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2540

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2540

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Translational Research

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Translational Research newsletter — top stories in biotechnology, drug discovery and pharma.

Get what matters in translational research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Translational Research