Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21190580›Full record

ArticleBMC systems biology2010

Improving the iMM904 S. cerevisiae metabolic model using essentiality and synthetic lethality data.

Ali R Zomorrodi, Costas D Maranas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC systems biology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. A workflow for annotating the knowledge gaps in metabolic reconstructions using known and hypothetical reactions.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  5. A roadmap for the functional annotation of protein families: a community perspective.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Tolerance to NADH/NADiScience · 2021
    Article
  9. The number of catalytic cycles in an enzyme's lifetime and why it matters to metabolic engineering.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Genome-scale metabolic reconstruction of the non-model yeastMetabolic engineering communications · 2020
    Article
  12. Genetic buffering and potentiation in metabolism.PLoS computational biology · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ali R ZomorrodiDepartment of Chemical Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA.
Costas D Maranas

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSaccharomyces cerevisiae is the first eukaryotic organism for which a multi-compartment genome-scale metabolic model was constructed. Since then a sequence of improved metabolic reconstructions for yeast has been introduced. These metabolic models have been extensively used to elucidate the organizational principles of yeast metabolism and drive yeast strain engineering strategies for targeted overproductions. They have also served as a starting point and a benchmark for the reconstruction of genome-scale metabolic models for other eukaryotic organisms. In spite of the successive improvements in the details of the described metabolic processes, even the recent yeast model (i.e., iMM904) remains significantly less predictive than the latest E. coli model (i.e., iAF1260). This is manifested by its significantly lower specificity in predicting the outcome of grow/no grow experiments in comparison to the E. coli model.

resultsIn this paper we make use of the automated GrowMatch procedure for restoring consistency with single gene deletion experiments in yeast and extend the procedure to make use of synthetic lethality data using the genome-scale model iMM904 as a basis. We identified and vetted using literature sources 120 distinct model modifications including various regulatory constraints for minimal and YP media. The incorporation of the suggested modifications led to a substantial increase in the fraction of correctly predicted lethal knockouts (i.e., specificity) from 38.84% (87 out of 224) to 53.57% (120 out of 224) for the minimal medium and from 24.73% (45 out of 182) to 40.11% (73 out of 182) for the YP medium. Synthetic lethality predictions improved from 12.03% (16 out of 133) to 23.31% (31 out of 133) for the minimal medium and from 6.96% (8 out of 115) to 13.04% (15 out of 115) for the YP medium.

conclusionsOverall, this study provides a roadmap for the computationally driven correction of multi-compartment genome-scale metabolic models and demonstrates the value of synthetic lethals as curation agents.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalMutationGenes, EssentialGenes, FungalGenes, LethalOrganic ChemicalsSaccharomyces cerevisiaeOrganic Chemicals

Identifiers

PMID21190580
PMCPMC3023687

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.