ArticlePLoS computational biology2014
Likelihood-based gene annotations for gap filling and quality assessment in genome-scale metabolic models.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
43 citing papers in PubMed.
- A multi-way SMILES-based hypergraph inference network for metabolic model reconstruction.Communications biology · 2026Article
- Reducing redundancy and enhancing accuracy through a phylogenetically-informed microbial community metabolic modeling approach.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Influence of multi-species data on gene-disease associations in substance use disorder using random walk with restart models.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Applications of genome-scale metabolic models to investigate microbial metabolic adaptations in response to genetic or environmental perturbations.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2023Review
- A gap-filling algorithm for prediction of metabolic interactions in microbial communities.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- gapseq: informed prediction of bacterial metabolic pathways and reconstruction of accurate metabolic models.Genome biology · 2021Article
- Addressing uncertainty in genome-scale metabolic model reconstruction and analysis.Genome biology · 2021Review
- MetGEMs Toolbox: Metagenome-scale models as integrative toolbox for uncovering metabolic functions and routes of human gut microbiome.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- Systematically gap-filling the genome-scale metabolic model of CHO cells.Biotechnology letters · 2021Article
- A systematic evaluation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Genome-Scale Metabolic Networks.PLoS computational biology · 2020Article
- Computational systems biology of cellular processes in Arabidopsis thaliana: an overview.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2020Review
- Guiding the Refinement of Biochemical Knowledgebases with Ensembles of Metabolic Networks and Machine Learning.Cell systems · 2020Article
- ReCodLiver0.9: Overcoming Challenges in Genome-Scale Metabolic Reconstruction of a Non-model Species.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2020Article
- Article
- Gsmodutils: a python based framework for test-driven genome scale metabolic model development.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2019Article
- Modelling approaches for studying the microbiome.Nature microbiology · 2019Review
- Combining multiple functional annotation tools increases coverage of metabolic annotation.BMC genomics · 2018Article
- Distinct microbes, metabolites, and ecologies define the microbiome in deficient and proficient mismatch repair colorectal cancers.Genome medicine · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genome-scale metabolic models provide a powerful means to harness information from genomes to deepen biological insights. With exponentially increasing sequencing capacity, there is an enormous need for automated reconstruction techniques that can provide more accurate models in a short time frame. Current methods for automated metabolic network reconstruction rely on gene and reaction annotations to build draft metabolic networks and algorithms to fill gaps in these networks. However, automated reconstruction is hampered by database inconsistencies, incorrect annotations, and gap filling largely without considering genomic information. Here we develop an approach for applying genomic information to predict alternative functions for genes and estimate their likelihoods from sequence homology. We show that computed likelihood values were significantly higher for annotations found in manually curated metabolic networks than those that were not. We then apply these alternative functional predictions to estimate reaction likelihoods, which are used in a new gap filling approach called likelihood-based gap filling to predict more genomically consistent solutions. To validate the likelihood-based gap filling approach, we applied it to models where essential pathways were removed, finding that likelihood-based gap filling identified more biologically relevant solutions than parsimony-based gap filling approaches. We also demonstrate that models gap filled using likelihood-based gap filling provide greater coverage and genomic consistency with metabolic gene functions compared to parsimony-based approaches. Interestingly, despite these findings, we found that likelihoods did not significantly affect consistency of gap filled models with Biolog and knockout lethality data. This indicates that the phenotype data alone cannot necessarily be used to discriminate between alternative solutions for gap filling and therefore, that the use of other information is necessary to obtain a more accurate network. All described workflows are implemented as part of the DOE Systems Biology Knowledgebase (KBase) and are publicly available via API or command-line web interface.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.