Weighted correlation network analysis

Last updated

Weighted correlation network analysis, also known as weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA), is a widely used data mining method especially for studying biological networks based on pairwise correlations between variables. While it can be applied to most high-dimensional data sets, it has been most widely used in genomic applications. It allows one to define modules (clusters), intramodular hubs, and network nodes with regard to module membership, to study the relationships between co-expression modules, and to compare the network topology of different networks (differential network analysis). WGCNA can be used as a data reduction technique (related to oblique factor analysis), as a clustering method (fuzzy clustering), as a feature selection method (e.g. as gene screening method), as a framework for integrating complementary (genomic) data (based on weighted correlations between quantitative variables), and as a data exploratory technique. [1] Although WGCNA incorporates traditional data exploratory techniques, its intuitive network language and analysis framework transcend any standard analysis technique. Since it uses network methodology and is well suited for integrating complementary genomic data sets, it can be interpreted as systems biologic or systems genetic data analysis method. By selecting intramodular hubs in consensus modules, WGCNA also gives rise to network based meta analysis techniques. [2]

Contents

History

The WGCNA method was developed by Steve Horvath, a professor of human genetics at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and of biostatistics at the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health and his colleagues at UCLA, and (former) lab members (in particular Peter Langfelder, Bin Zhang, Jun Dong). Much of the work arose from collaborations with applied researchers. In particular, weighted correlation networks were developed in joint discussions with cancer researchers Paul Mischel, Stanley F. Nelson, and neuroscientists Daniel H. Geschwind, Michael C. Oldham, according to the acknowledgement section in. [1]

Comparison between weighted and unweighted correlation networks

A weighted correlation network can be interpreted as special case of a weighted network, dependency network or correlation network. Weighted correlation network analysis can be attractive for the following reasons:

Method

First, one defines a gene co-expression similarity measure which is used to define the network. We denote the gene co-expression similarity measure of a pair of genes i and j by . Many co-expression studies use the absolute value of the correlation as an unsigned co-expression similarity measure,

where gene expression profiles and consist of the expression of genes i and j across multiple samples. However, using the absolute value of the correlation may obfuscate biologically relevant information, since no distinction is made between gene repression and activation. In contrast, in signed networks the similarity between genes reflects the sign of the correlation of their expression profiles. To define a signed co-expression measure between gene expression profiles and , one can use a simple transformation of the correlation:

As the unsigned measure , the signed similarity takes on a value between 0 and 1. Note that the unsigned similarity between two oppositely expressed genes () equals 1 while it equals 0 for the signed similarity. Similarly, while the unsigned co-expression measure of two genes with zero correlation remains zero, the signed similarity equals 0.5.

Next, an adjacency matrix (network), , is used to quantify how strongly genes are connected to one another. is defined by thresholding the co-expression similarity matrix . 'Hard' thresholding (dichotomizing) the similarity measure results in an unweighted gene co-expression network. Specifically an unweighted network adjacency is defined to be 1 if and 0 otherwise. Because hard thresholding encodes gene connections in a binary fashion, it can be sensitive to the choice of the threshold and result in the loss of co-expression information. [3] The continuous nature of the co-expression information can be preserved by employing soft thresholding, which results in a weighted network. Specifically, WGCNA uses the following power function assess their connection strength:

,

where the power is the soft thresholding parameter. The default values and are used for unsigned and signed networks, respectively. Alternatively, can be chosen using the scale-free topology criterion which amounts to choosing the smallest value of such that approximate scale free topology is reached. [3]

Since , the weighted network adjacency is linearly related to the co-expression similarity on a logarithmic scale. Note that a high power transforms high similarities into high adjacencies, while pushing low similarities towards 0. Since this soft-thresholding procedure applied to a pairwise correlation matrix leads to weighted adjacency matrix, the ensuing analysis is referred to as weighted gene co-expression network analysis.

A major step in the module centric analysis is to cluster genes into network modules using a network proximity measure. Roughly speaking, a pair of genes has a high proximity if it is closely interconnected. By convention, the maximal proximity between two genes is 1 and the minimum proximity is 0. Typically, WGCNA uses the topological overlap measure (TOM) as proximity. [9] [10] which can also be defined for weighted networks. [3] The TOM combines the adjacency of two genes and the connection strengths these two genes share with other "third party" genes. The TOM is a highly robust measure of network interconnectedness (proximity). This proximity is used as input of average linkage hierarchical clustering. Modules are defined as branches of the resulting cluster tree using the dynamic branch cutting approach. [11] Next the genes inside a given module are summarized with the module eigengene, which can be considered as the best summary of the standardized module expression data. [4] The module eigengene of a given module is defined as the first principal component of the standardized expression profiles. Eigengenes define robust biomarkers, [12] and can be used as features in complex machine learning models such as Bayesian networks. [13] To find modules that relate to a clinical trait of interest, module eigengenes are correlated with the clinical trait of interest, which gives rise to an eigengene significance measure. Eigengenes can be used as features in more complex predictive models including decision trees and Bayesian networks. [12] One can also construct co-expression networks between module eigengenes (eigengene networks), i.e. networks whose nodes are modules. [14] To identify intramodular hub genes inside a given module, one can use two types of connectivity measures. The first, referred to as , is defined based on correlating each gene with the respective module eigengene. The second, referred to as kIN, is defined as a sum of adjacencies with respect to the module genes. In practice, these two measures are equivalent. [4] To test whether a module is preserved in another data set, one can use various network statistics, e.g. . [6]

Applications

WGCNA has been widely used for analyzing gene expression data (i.e. transcriptional data), e.g. to find intramodular hub genes. [2] [15] Such as, WGCNA study reveals novel transcription factors are associated with Bisphenol A (BPA) dose-response. [16]

It is often used as data reduction step in systems genetic applications where modules are represented by "module eigengenes" e.g. [17] [18] Module eigengenes can be used to correlate modules with clinical traits. Eigengene networks are coexpression networks between module eigengenes (i.e. networks whose nodes are modules) . WGCNA is widely used in neuroscientific applications, e.g. [19] [20] and for analyzing genomic data including microarray data, [21] single cell RNA-Seq data [22] [23] DNA methylation data, [24] miRNA data, peptide counts [25] and microbiota data (16S rRNA gene sequencing). [26] Other applications include brain imaging data, e.g. functional MRI data. [27]

R software package

The WGCNA R software package [28] provides functions for carrying out all aspects of weighted network analysis (module construction, hub gene selection, module preservation statistics, differential network analysis, network statistics). The WGCNA package is available from the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN), the standard repository for R add-on packages.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Heritability</span> Estimation of effect of genetic variation on phenotypic variation of a trait

Heritability is a statistic used in the fields of breeding and genetics that estimates the degree of variation in a phenotypic trait in a population that is due to genetic variation between individuals in that population. The concept of heritability can be expressed in the form of the following question: "What is the proportion of the variation in a given trait within a population that is not explained by the environment or random chance?"

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gene regulatory network</span> Collection of molecular regulators

A generegulatory network (GRN) is a collection of molecular regulators that interact with each other and with other substances in the cell to govern the gene expression levels of mRNA and proteins which, in turn, determine the function of the cell. GRN also play a central role in morphogenesis, the creation of body structures, which in turn is central to evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cluster analysis</span> Grouping a set of objects by similarity

Cluster analysis or clustering is the task of grouping a set of objects in such a way that objects in the same group are more similar to each other than to those in other groups (clusters). It is a main task of exploratory data analysis, and a common technique for statistical data analysis, used in many fields, including pattern recognition, image analysis, information retrieval, bioinformatics, data compression, computer graphics and machine learning.

In statistics and related fields, a similarity measure or similarity function or similarity metric is a real-valued function that quantifies the similarity between two objects. Although no single definition of a similarity exists, usually such measures are in some sense the inverse of distance metrics: they take on large values for similar objects and either zero or a negative value for very dissimilar objects. Though, in more broad terms, a similarity function may also satisfy metric axioms.

Feature selection is the process of selecting a subset of relevant features for use in model construction. Stylometry and DNA microarray analysis are two cases where feature selection is used. It should be distinguished from feature extraction.

In graph theory, a clustering coefficient is a measure of the degree to which nodes in a graph tend to cluster together. Evidence suggests that in most real-world networks, and in particular social networks, nodes tend to create tightly knit groups characterised by a relatively high density of ties; this likelihood tends to be greater than the average probability of a tie randomly established between two nodes.

Biclustering, block clustering, Co-clustering or two-mode clustering is a data mining technique which allows simultaneous clustering of the rows and columns of a matrix. The term was first introduced by Boris Mirkin to name a technique introduced many years earlier, in 1972, by John A. Hartigan.

Fuzzy clustering is a form of clustering in which each data point can belong to more than one cluster.

In statistics, a rank correlation is any of several statistics that measure an ordinal association—the relationship between rankings of different ordinal variables or different rankings of the same variable, where a "ranking" is the assignment of the ordering labels "first", "second", "third", etc. to different observations of a particular variable. A rank correlation coefficient measures the degree of similarity between two rankings, and can be used to assess the significance of the relation between them. For example, two common nonparametric methods of significance that use rank correlation are the Mann–Whitney U test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Microarray analysis techniques</span>

Microarray analysis techniques are used in interpreting the data generated from experiments on DNA, RNA, and protein microarrays, which allow researchers to investigate the expression state of a large number of genes – in many cases, an organism's entire genome – in a single experiment. Such experiments can generate very large amounts of data, allowing researchers to assess the overall state of a cell or organism. Data in such large quantities is difficult – if not impossible – to analyze without the help of computer programs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intraclass correlation</span> Descriptive statistic

In statistics, the intraclass correlation, or the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), is a descriptive statistic that can be used when quantitative measurements are made on units that are organized into groups. It describes how strongly units in the same group resemble each other. While it is viewed as a type of correlation, unlike most other correlation measures, it operates on data structured as groups rather than data structured as paired observations.

Morans <i>I</i> Measure of spatial autocorrelation

In statistics, Moran's I is a measure of spatial autocorrelation developed by Patrick Alfred Pierce Moran. Spatial autocorrelation is characterized by a correlation in a signal among nearby locations in space. Spatial autocorrelation is more complex than one-dimensional autocorrelation because spatial correlation is multi-dimensional and multi-directional.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Biological network</span> Method of representing systems

A biological network is a method of representing systems as complex sets of binary interactions or relations between various biological entities. In general, networks or graphs are used to capture relationships between entities or objects. A typical graphing representation consists of a set of nodes connected by edges.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Weighted network</span> Network where the ties among nodes have weights assigned to them

A weighted network is a network where the ties among nodes have weights assigned to them. A network is a system whose elements are somehow connected. The elements of a system are represented as nodes and the connections among interacting elements are known as ties, edges, arcs, or links. The nodes might be neurons, individuals, groups, organisations, airports, or even countries, whereas ties can take the form of friendship, communication, collaboration, alliance, flow, or trade, to name a few.

In bioinformatics, alignment-free sequence analysis approaches to molecular sequence and structure data provide alternatives over alignment-based approaches.

Denoising Algorithm based on Relevance network Topology (DART) is an unsupervised algorithm that estimates an activity score for a pathway in a gene expression matrix, following a denoising step. In DART, a weighted average is used where the weights reflect the degree of the nodes in the pruned network. The denoising step removes prior information that is inconsistent with a data set. This strategy substantially improves unsupervised predictions of pathway activity that are based on a prior model, which was learned from a different biological system or context.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gene co-expression network</span>

A gene co-expression network (GCN) is an undirected graph, where each node corresponds to a gene, and a pair of nodes is connected with an edge if there is a significant co-expression relationship between them. Having gene expression profiles of a number of genes for several samples or experimental conditions, a gene co-expression network can be constructed by looking for pairs of genes which show a similar expression pattern across samples, since the transcript levels of two co-expressed genes rise and fall together across samples. Gene co-expression networks are of biological interest since co-expressed genes are controlled by the same transcriptional regulatory program, functionally related, or members of the same pathway or protein complex.

The first phenotypic disease network was constructed by Hidalgo et al. (2009) to help understand the origins of many diseases and the links between them. Hidalgo et al. (2009) defined diseases as specific sets of phenotypes that affect one or several physiological systems, and compiled data on pairwise comorbidity correlations for more than 10,000 diseases reconstructed from over 30 million medical records. Hidalgo et al. (2009) presented their data in the form of a network with diseases as the nodes and comorbidity correlations as the links. Intuitively, the phenotypic disease network (PDN) can be seen as a map of the phenotypic space whose structure can contribute to the understanding of disease progression.

In statistics, biweight midcorrelation is a measure of similarity between samples. It is median-based, rather than mean-based, thus is less sensitive to outliers, and can be a robust alternative to other similarity metrics, such as Pearson correlation or mutual information.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Steve Horvath</span> German–American aging researcher, geneticist and biostatistician

Steve Horvath is a German–American aging researcher, geneticist, and biostatistician. He is a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles known for developing the Horvath aging clock, which is a highly accurate molecular biomarker of aging, and for developing weighted correlation network analysis. His work on the genomic biomarkers of aging, the aging process, and many age related diseases/conditions has earned him several research awards. Horvath is a principal investigator at the anti-aging startup Altos Labs and co-founder of nonprofit Clock Foundation.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Horvath S (2011). Weighted Network Analysis: Application in Genomics and Systems Biology. New York, NY: Springer. ISBN   978-1-4419-8818-8.
  2. 1 2 Langfelder P, Mischel PS, Horvath S, Ravasi T (17 April 2013). "When Is Hub Gene Selection Better than Standard Meta-Analysis?". PLOS ONE. 8 (4): e61505. Bibcode:2013PLoSO...861505L. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061505 . PMC   3629234 . PMID   23613865.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 Zhang B, Horvath S (2005). "A general framework for weighted gene co-expression network analysis" (PDF). Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology. 4: 17. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.471.9599 . doi:10.2202/1544-6115.1128. PMID   16646834. S2CID   7756201. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2020-09-28. Retrieved 2013-11-29.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 Horvath S, Dong J (2008). "Geometric Interpretation of Gene Coexpression Network Analysis". PLOS Computational Biology. 4 (8): e1000117. Bibcode:2008PLSCB...4E0117H. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000117 . PMC   2446438 . PMID   18704157.
  5. ↑ Oldham MC, Langfelder P, Horvath S (12 June 2012). "Network methods for describing sample relationships in genomic datasets: application to Huntington's disease". BMC Systems Biology. 6: 63. doi: 10.1186/1752-0509-6-63 . PMC   3441531 . PMID   22691535.
  6. 1 2 Langfelder P, Luo R, Oldham MC, Horvath S (20 January 2011). "Is my network module preserved and reproducible?". PLOS Computational Biology. 7 (1): e1001057. Bibcode:2011PLSCB...7E1057L. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1001057 . PMC   3024255 . PMID   21283776.
  7. ↑ Dong J, Horvath S (4 June 2007). "Understanding network concepts in modules". BMC Systems Biology. 1: 24. doi: 10.1186/1752-0509-1-24 . PMC   3238286 . PMID   17547772.
  8. ↑ Ranola JM, Langfelder P, Lange K, Horvath S (14 March 2013). "Cluster and propensity based approximation of a network". BMC Systems Biology. 7: 21. doi: 10.1186/1752-0509-7-21 . PMC   3663730 . PMID   23497424.
  9. ↑ Ravasz E, Somera AL, Mongru DA, Oltvai ZN, Barabasi AL (2002). "Hierarchical organization of modularity in metabolic networks". Science. 297 (5586): 1551–1555. arXiv: cond-mat/0209244 . Bibcode:2002Sci...297.1551R. doi:10.1126/science.1073374. PMID   12202830. S2CID   14452443.
  10. ↑ Yip AM, Horvath S (24 January 2007). "Gene network interconnectedness and the generalized topological overlap measure". BMC Bioinformatics. 8: 22. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-8-22 . PMC   1797055 . PMID   17250769.
  11. ↑ Langfelder P, Zhang B, Horvath S (2007). "Defining clusters from a hierarchical cluster tree: the Dynamic Tree Cut library for R". Bioinformatics. 24 (5): 719–20. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btm563. PMID   18024473. S2CID   1095190.
  12. 1 2 Foroushani A, Agrahari R, Docking R, Chang L, Duns G, Hudoba M, Karsan A, Zare H (16 March 2017). "Large-scale gene network analysis reveals the significance of extracellular matrix pathway and homeobox genes in acute myeloid leukemia: an introduction to the Pigengene package and its applications". BMC Medical Genomics. 10 (1): 16. doi: 10.1186/s12920-017-0253-6 . PMC   5353782 . PMID   28298217.
  13. ↑ Agrahari, Rupesh; Foroushani, Amir; Docking, T. Roderick; Chang, Linda; Duns, Gerben; Hudoba, Monika; Karsan, Aly; Zare, Habil (3 May 2018). "Applications of Bayesian network models in predicting types of hematological malignancies". Scientific Reports. 8 (1): 6951. Bibcode:2018NatSR...8.6951A. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-24758-5. ISSN   2045-2322. PMC   5934387 . PMID   29725024.
  14. ↑ Langfelder P, Horvath S (2007). "Eigengene networks for studying the relationships between co-expression modules". BMC Systems Biology. 2007 (1): 54. doi: 10.1186/1752-0509-1-54 . PMC   2267703 . PMID   18031580.
  15. ↑ Horvath S, Zhang B, Carlson M, Lu KV, Zhu S, Felciano RM, Laurance MF, Zhao W, Shu Q, Lee Y, Scheck AC, Liau LM, Wu H, Geschwind DH, Febbo PG, Kornblum HI, Cloughesy TF, Nelson SF, Mischel PS (2006). "Analysis of Oncogenic Signaling Networks in Glioblastoma Identifies ASPM as a Novel Molecular Target". PNAS. 103 (46): 17402–17407. Bibcode:2006PNAS..10317402H. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0608396103 . PMC   1635024 . PMID   17090670.
  16. ↑ Hartung, Thomas; Kleensang, Andre; Tran, Vy; Maertens, Alexandra (2018). "Weighted Gene Correlation Network Analysis (WGCNA) Reveals Novel Transcription Factors Associated With Bisphenol A Dose-Response". Frontiers in Genetics. 9: 508. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2018.00508 . ISSN   1664-8021. PMC   6240694 . PMID   30483308.
  17. ↑ Chen Y, Zhu J, Lum PY, Yang X, Pinto S, MacNeil DJ, Zhang C, Lamb J, Edwards S, Sieberts SK, Leonardson A, Castellini LW, Wang S, Champy MF, Zhang B, Emilsson V, Doss S, Ghazalpour A, Horvath S, Drake TA, Lusis AJ, Schadt EE (27 March 2008). "Variations in DNA elucidate molecular networks that cause disease". Nature. 452 (7186): 429–35. Bibcode:2008Natur.452..429C. doi:10.1038/nature06757. PMC   2841398 . PMID   18344982.
  18. ↑ Plaisier CL, Horvath S, Huertas-Vazquez A, Cruz-Bautista I, Herrera MF, Tusie-Luna T, Aguilar-Salinas C, Pajukanta P, Storey JD (11 September 2009). "A Systems Genetics Approach Implicates USF1, FADS3, and Other Causal Candidate Genes for Familial Combined Hyperlipidemia". PLOS Genetics. 5 (9): e1000642. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000642 . PMC   2730565 . PMID   19750004.
  19. ↑ Voineagu I, Wang X, Johnston P, Lowe JK, Tian Y, Horvath S, Mill J, Cantor RM, Blencowe BJ, Geschwind DH (25 May 2011). "Transcriptomic analysis of autistic brain reveals convergent molecular pathology". Nature. 474 (7351): 380–4. doi:10.1038/nature10110. PMC   3607626 . PMID   21614001.
  20. ↑ Hawrylycz MJ, Lein ES, Guillozet-Bongaarts AL, Shen EH, Ng L, Miller JA, van de Lagemaat LN, Smith KA, Ebbert A, Riley ZL, Abajian C, Beckmann CF, Bernard A, Bertagnolli D, Boe AF, Cartagena PM, Chakravarty MM, Chapin M, Chong J, Dalley RA, David Daly B, Dang C, Datta S, Dee N, Dolbeare TA, Faber V, Feng D, Fowler DR, Goldy J, Gregor BW, Haradon Z, Haynor DR, Hohmann JG, Horvath S, Howard RE, Jeromin A, Jochim JM, Kinnunen M, Lau C, Lazarz ET, Lee C, Lemon TA, Li L, Li Y, Morris JA, Overly CC, Parker PD, Parry SE, Reding M, Royall JJ, Schulkin J, Sequeira PA, Slaughterbeck CR, Smith SC, Sodt AJ, Sunkin SM, Swanson BE, Vawter MP, Williams D, Wohnoutka P, Zielke HR, Geschwind DH, Hof PR, Smith SM, Koch C, Grant S, Jones AR (20 September 2012). "An anatomically comprehensive atlas of the adult human brain transcriptome". Nature. 489 (7416): 391–399. Bibcode:2012Natur.489..391H. doi:10.1038/nature11405. PMC   4243026 . PMID   22996553.
  21. ↑ Kadarmideen HN, Watson-Haigh NS, Andronicos NM (2011). "Systems biology of ovine intestinal parasite resistance: disease gene modules and biomarkers". Molecular BioSystems. 7 (1): 235–246. doi:10.1039/C0MB00190B. PMID   21072409.
  22. ↑ Kogelman LJ, Cirera S, Zhernakova DV, Fredholm M, Franke L, Kadarmideen HN (30 September 2014). "Identification of co-expression gene networks, regulatory genes and pathways for obesity based on adipose tissue RNA Sequencing in a porcine model". BMC Medical Genomics. 7 (1): 57. doi: 10.1186/1755-8794-7-57 . PMC   4183073 . PMID   25270054.
  23. ↑ Xue Z, Huang K, Cai C, Cai L, Jiang CY, Feng Y, Liu Z, Zeng Q, Cheng L, Sun YE, Liu JY, Horvath S, Fan G (29 August 2013). "Genetic programs in human and mouse early embryos revealed by single-cell RNA sequencing". Nature. 500 (7464): 593–7. Bibcode:2013Natur.500..593X. doi:10.1038/nature12364. PMC   4950944 . PMID   23892778.
  24. ↑ Horvath S, Zhang Y, Langfelder P, Kahn RS, Boks MP, van Eijk K, van den Berg LH, Ophoff RA (3 October 2012). "Aging effects on DNA methylation modules in human brain and blood tissue". Genome Biology. 13 (10): R97. doi: 10.1186/gb-2012-13-10-r97 . PMC   4053733 . PMID   23034122.
  25. ↑ Shirasaki DI, Greiner ER, Al-Ramahi I, Gray M, Boontheung P, Geschwind DH, Botas J, Coppola G, Horvath S, Loo JA, Yang XW (12 July 2012). "Network organization of the huntingtin proteomic interactome in mammalian brain". Neuron. 75 (1): 41–57. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2012.05.024. PMC   3432264 . PMID   22794259.
  26. ↑ Tong, Maomeng; Li, Xiaoxiao; Wegener Parfrey, Laura; Roth, Bennett; Ippoliti, Andrew; Wei, Bo; Borneman, James; McGovern, Dermot P. B.; Frank, Daniel N.; Li, Ellen; Horvath, Steve; Knight, Rob; Braun, Jonathan (2013). "A Modular Organization of the Human Intestinal Mucosal Microbiota and Its Association with Inflammatory Bowel Disease". PLOS ONE. 8 (11): e80702. doi: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0080702 . PMC   3834335 . PMID   24260458.
  27. ↑ Mumford JA, Horvath S, Oldham MC, Langfelder P, Geschwind DH, Poldrack RA (1 October 2010). "Detecting network modules in fMRI time series: a weighted network analysis approach". NeuroImage. 52 (4): 1465–76. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.05.047. PMC   3632300 . PMID   20553896.
  28. ↑ Langfelder P, Horvath S (29 December 2008). "WGCNA: an R package for weighted correlation network analysis". BMC Bioinformatics. 9: 559. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-9-559 . PMC   2631488 . PMID   19114008.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.