Back

BioNetComp: a Python package for biological network development and comparison

Carvalho, L. M.

2021-04-15 bioinformatics
10.1101/2021.04.14.439897 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Due to the large generation of omics data on a large scale in the last few years, the extraction of information from biological data has become more complex and its integration or comparison as well. One of the ways to represent interactions of biological data is through networks, which summarize information on interactions between their nodes through edges. The comparison of two biological networks using network metrics, biological enrichment, and visualization consists of data that allows us to understand differences in the interactomes of contrasting conditions. We describe BioNetComp, a python package to compare two different interactomes through different metrics and data visualization without the need for a web platform or software, just by command-line. As a result, we present a comparison made between the interactomes generated from the differentially expressed genes at two different points during a typical bioethanol fermentation. BioNetComp is available at github.com/lmigueel/BioNetComp.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Bioinformatics
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 2%
15.1%
Similar papers in this journal
2
BMC Bioinformatics
○ 457 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
12.7%
Similar papers in this journal
3
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 25%
6.3%
Similar papers in this journal
4
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
◐ 242 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.1%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Computational Biology and Chemistry
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
6
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 9%
4.1%
Similar papers in this journal
7
Briefings in Bioinformatics
◐ 354 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.3%
8
Biosystems
○ 31 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
9
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 35%
3.1%
10
BMC Genomics
○ 406 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.8%
11
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.8%
12
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.7%
13
Bioinformatics Advances
◐ 203 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
14
Nucleic Acids Research
◐ 1281 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.7%
15
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
○ 494 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.4%
16
F1000Research
○ 88 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
17
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
○ 49 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.3%
18
Frontiers in Genetics
○ 230 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
19
Database
◐ 61 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
20
Journal of Computational Biology
○ 48 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
21
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
○ 98 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
22
Genes
○ 144 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
23
Metabolites
○ 53 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.1%
24
Biology
○ 45 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.0%
25
Computers in Biology and Medicine
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
26
Frontiers in Microbiology
○ 427 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.8%
27
Microorganisms
○ 106 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
28
GigaScience
◐ 212 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
29
mSystems
● 394 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%
30
Biotechnology and Bioengineering
○ 53 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.