ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2017
Assessing and Resolving Model Misspecifications in Metabolic Flux Analysis.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Metabolic flux analysis (MFA) is an indispensable tool in metabolic engineering. The simplest variant of MFA relies on an overdetermined stoichiometric model of the cell's metabolism under the pseudo-steady state assumption to evaluate the intracellular flux distribution. Despite its long history, the issue of model error in overdetermined MFA, particularly misspecifications of the stoichiometric matrix, has not received much attention. We evaluated the performance of statistical tests from linear least square regressions, namely Ramsey's Regression Equation Specification Error Test (RESET), the F-test, and the Lagrange multiplier test, in detecting model misspecifications in the overdetermined MFA, particularly missing reactions. We further proposed an iterative procedure using the F-test to correct such an issue. Using Chinese hamster ovary and random metabolic networks, we demonstrated that: (1) a statistically significant regression does not guarantee high accuracy of the flux estimates; (2) the removal of a reaction with a low flux magnitude can cause disproportionately large biases in the flux estimates; (3) the F-test could efficiently detect missing reactions; and (4) the proposed iterative procedure could robustly resolve the omission of reactions. Our work demonstrated that statistical analysis and tests could be used to systematically assess, detect, and resolve model misspecifications in the overdetermined MFA.
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.