Gone are the days when people kept on rolling new names through the books' release. You coin the term, blog it and blow it. Today, systems biology is eyeing everywhere. Akin to many, systems biology to me is not just deciphering biology of a system, protein-protein interactions, fluxes, metabolism but a deep-rooted biology within an organism, finally providing us the clues in the form of a "functome". I peg my thoughts on the challenges this multi-dimensional biology has brought in annotation of proteins especially annotating the un-annotated.
Start 2006, whence my PhD studies were middle way, I wondered what and how systems biology could teach me about hypothetical proteins in human. The then draft release of human genome came across several hypothetical proteins. The ensuing drafts too provided no significant clues and had no or little change in the numbers. The obvious reason was that these proteins are electronically annotated. Does electronic annotation mean an elegant footnote? Is it unswerving? Does manual annotation follows electronic annotation? Does it bring any change in number of hypothetical proteins or proteins awaiting function? There were more questions than answers. The top-down systems biology delve upon how we could make use of umpteen proteins and study interactions while the bottom-up systems biology explore the metabolic fluxes, pathways and ins and outs towards the function of the genes (figure 1).

Figure 1
About Our Guest Blogger:
Prash works at Bioinformatics team, CDAC, Pune, India. He also serve as an Associate Director of Bioinformatics.org. He founded Bioclues.org in 2006, a virtual organization, that masks projects online and builds mentor-mentee relationship.




