Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting 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.

Global protein function prediction from protein-protein interaction networks


Determining protein function is one of the most challenging problems of the post-genomic era. The availability of entire genome sequences and of high-throughput capabilities to determine gene coexpression patterns has shifted the research focus from the study of single proteins or small complexes to that of the entire proteome1. In this context, the search for reliable methods for assigning protein function is of primary importance. There are various approaches available for deducing the function of proteins of unknown function using information derived from sequence similarity or clustering patterns of co-regulated genes2,3, phylogenetic profiles4, protein-protein interactions (refs. 58 and Samanta, M.P. and Liang, S., unpublished data), and protein complexes9,10. Here we propose the assignment of proteins to functional classes on the basis of their network of physical interactions as determined by minimizing the number of protein interactions among different functional categories. Function assignment is proteome-wide and is determined by the global connectivity pattern of the protein network. The approach results in multiple functional assignments, a consequence of the existence of multiple equivalent solutions. We apply the method to analyze the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae protein-protein interaction network5. The robustness of the approach is tested in a system containing a high percentage of unclassified proteins and also in cases of deletion and insertion of specific protein interactions.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Illustration of the method.
Figure 2: Statistical reliability of the method.


  1. 1

    Hodgman, T.C. A historical perspective on gene/protein functional assignment. Bioinformatics 16, 10–15 (2000).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Zhang, M.Q. Promoter analysis of co-regulated genes in the yeast genome. Comput. Chem. 23, 233–250 (1999).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Harrington, H.C., Rosenow, C. & Retief, J. Monitoring gene expression using DNA microarrays. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 3, 285–291 (2000).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Pellegrini, M., Marcotte, E., Thompson, M.J., Eisenberg, D. & Yeates, T.O. Assigning protein functions by comparative genome analysis: protein phylogenetic profiles. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 96, 4285–4288 (1999).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Uetz, P. et al. A comprehensive analysis of protein-protein interactions in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nature 403, 623–627 (2000).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Ito, T. et al. Toward a protein-protein interaction map of the budding yeast: a comprehensive system to examine two-hybrid interactions in all possible combinations between the yeast proteins. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 4569–1147 (2001).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Schwikowski, B., Uetz, P. & Fields, S. A network of protein-protein interactions in yeast. Nat. Biotechnol. 18, 1257–1261 (2000).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Hishigaki, H., Nakai, K., Ono, T., Tanigami, A. & Tagaki, T. Assessment of prediction accuracy of protein function from protein-protein interaction data. Yeast 18, 523–531 (2001).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Gavin, A. et al. Functional organization of the yeast proteome by systematic analysis of protein complexes. Nature 415, 141–147 (2002).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Ho, Y. et al. Systematic identification of protein complexes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by mass spectrometry. Nature 415, 180–183 (2002).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Wagner, A. Robustness again mutations in genetic networks of yeast. Nat. Genet. 24, 355–361 (2000).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Jeong, H., Mason, S.P., Barabasi, A.L. & Oltwai, Z.W. Lethality and centrality in protein networks. Nature 411, 41 (2001).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Meyer, M.L. & Hieter, P. Protein networks—built by association. Nat. Biotechnol. 18, 1242–1243 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Wu, F.Y. The Potts Model. Rev. Mod. Phys. 54, 235–268 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    The MIPS Comprehensive Yeast Genome Database (CYGD),

  16. 16

    Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C.D. & Vecchi, M.P. Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 220, 621–680 (1983).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexei Vazquez.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vazquez, A., Flammini, A., Maritan, A. et al. Global protein function prediction from protein-protein interaction networks. Nat Biotechnol 21, 697–700 (2003).

Download citation

Further reading


Quick links