Table 1 Topological analysis—degree, betweenness, closeness centrality and cluster analysis of the network analyzed using Cytohubba plugin.

From: Decoding the molecular mechanism of parthenocarpy in Musa spp. through protein–protein interaction network

(A) Ranked by degree

(B) Ranked by betweenness method

(C) Ranked by closeness method

(D) Ranked by MCC method

Rank

Node

Score

Rank

Node

Score

Rank

Node

Score

Rank

Node

Score

1

LFY

21

1

NIA1

3936

1

LFY

39.2159

1

ZEP

725,762

2

ZEP

12

2

ZEP

3694.22

2

FIE2

32.406

1

GAF1

725,762

2

GAF1

12

3

LFY

3602.76

3

GAF1

31.9071

3

EXPA1

725,761

4

EXPA1

11

4

NCED1

3534

4

NFYB9

31.0825

3

RAP23

725,761

4

RAP3

11

5

MOCOS

3480

5

ZEP

30.1262

5

HK2

725,760

6

HK2

10

6

GAF1

3319.09

6

MADS2

29.5825

5

At4g13710

725,760

6

At4g13710

10

7

FIE2

2807.91

7

EMF2

29.4159

5

BAM1

725,760

6

BAM1

10

8

E2FB

1994.8

7

MAD16

29.4159

5

SL1

725,760

6

SL1

10

9

PHSH

1609.17

9

EXPA1

29.1833

5

GH3.8

725,760

6

GH3.8

10

10

ANT

734.21

10

AP2

28.5762

10

SCL7

362,880