Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29059219›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

The fate of lysine: Non-targeted stable isotope analysis reveals parallel ways for lysine catabolization in Phaeobacter inhibens.

Lorenz C Reimer, Sabine E Will, Dietmar Schomburg

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Frontiers in plant science · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The Combination of Lead andFrontiers in microbiology · 2020
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lorenz C ReimerDepartment of Bioinformatics and Biochemistry, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7805-0660
Sabine E WillDepartment of Bioinformatics and Biochemistry, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany.
Dietmar SchomburgDepartment of Bioinformatics and Biochemistry, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany.
Technische Universität Braunschweig · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For a detailed investigation of the degradation of lysine in Phaeobacter inhibens DSM 17395, stable isotope experiments with uniformly 13C labeled L-lysine were carried out with lysine adapted cells and the metabolites were analyzed using GC/MS and HPLC/MS. A non-targeted stable isotope analysis was used which compares labeled and not labeled samples to determine the Mass Isotopomer Distribution not only for known metabolites but for all labeled compounds in our GC/MS analysis. We show that P. inhibens uses at least two parallel pathways for the first degradation steps of lysine. Further investigations identified L-pipecolate as an L-lysine degradation intermediate in P. inhibens. The analysis of HPLC/MS data as well as the labeling data of tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle intermediates show that L-lysine is not only catabolized directly to acetyl-CoA but also via the ethylmalonyl-CoA-pathway, leading to entry points into the TCA cycle via acetyl-CoA, succinyl-CoA, and malate. Altogether the presented data give a detailed insight into the catabolization of L-lysine following the fate of 13C labeled carbon via several ways into the TCA cycle.

Indexed as

Chromatography, High Pressure LiquidCitric Acid CycleGas Chromatography-Mass SpectrometryIsotopesLysineRhodobacteraceaeIsotopesLysine

Identifiers

PMID29059219
PMCPMC5653290
OpenAlexW2766746045

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.