Back

Integration of transcriptome, proteome and phosphoproteome data elucidates the genetic control of molecular networks

Grossbach, J.; Gillet, L.; Clement-Ziza, M.; Schmalohr, C. L.; Schubert, O. T.; Barnes, C. A.; Bludau, I.; Aebersold, R.; Beyer, A.

2019-07-16 systems biology
10.1101/703140 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Genomic variation affects cellular networks by altering diverse molecular layers such as RNA levels, protein abundance, and post-translational protein modifications. However, it remains unclear how these different layers are affected by genetic polymorphisms and give rise to complex physiological phenotypes. To address these questions, we generated high-quality transcriptome, proteome, and phosphoproteome data for a panel of 112 genetically diverse yeast strains. While genetic effects on transcript abundances were generally transmitted to the protein level, we found a significant uncoupling of the transcript-protein relationship for certain protein classes, such as subunits of protein complexes. The additional phosphoproteomics data suggests that the same genetic locus often affects distinct sets of genes within each of these layers. In particular, QTLs tended to affect upstream regulatory proteins at the phosphorylation layer, whereas downstream pathway targets were typically affected at the transcript and protein abundance layers. Underscoring the importance of regulatory protein phosphorylation in linking genetic to phenotypic variation is the finding that the number of protein phosphosites associated with a given genetic locus was more predictive for its influence on cellular growth traits than the number of transcripts or proteins.\n\nThis study shows how multi-layered molecular networks mediate the effects of genomic variants to more complex physiological traits and highlights the important role of protein phosphorylation in mediating these effects.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.