Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33879809›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Reaction lumping in metabolic networks for application with thermodynamic metabolic flux analysis.

Lea Seep, Zahra Razaghi-Moghadam, Zoran Nikoloski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Lea SeepBioinformatics, Institute for Biochemistry and Biology, University of Potsdam, 14476, Potsdam, Germany.
Zahra Razaghi-MoghadamBioinformatics, Institute for Biochemistry and Biology, University of Potsdam, 14476, Potsdam, Germany.
Zoran NikoloskiBioinformatics, Institute for Biochemistry and Biology, University of Potsdam, 14476, Potsdam, Germany. zniko@uni-potsdam.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Thermodynamic metabolic flux analysis (TMFA) can narrow down the space of steady-state flux distributions, but requires knowledge of the standard Gibbs free energy for the modelled reactions. The latter are often not available due to unknown Gibbs free energy change of formation [Formula: see text], of metabolites. To optimize the usage of data on thermodynamics in constraining a model, reaction lumping has been proposed to eliminate metabolites with unknown [Formula: see text]. However, the lumping procedure has not been formalized nor implemented for systematic identification of lumped reactions. Here, we propose, implement, and test a combined procedure for reaction lumping, applicable to genome-scale metabolic models. It is based on identification of groups of metabolites with unknown [Formula: see text] whose elimination can be conducted independently of the others via: (1) group implementation, aiming to eliminate an entire such group, and, if this is infeasible, (2) a sequential implementation to ensure that a maximal number of metabolites with unknown [Formula: see text] are eliminated. Our comparative analysis with genome-scale metabolic models of Escherichia coli, Bacillus subtilis, and Homo sapiens shows that the combined procedure provides an efficient means for systematic identification of lumped reactions. We also demonstrate that TMFA applied to models with reactions lumped according to the proposed procedure lead to more precise predictions in comparison to the original models. The provided implementation thus ensures the reproducibility of the findings and their application with standard TMFA.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBacillus subtilisComputer SimulationEscherichia coliHumansMetabolic Flux AnalysisMetabolic Networks and PathwaysModels, BiologicalReproducibility of ResultsThermodynamics

Identifiers

PMID33879809
PMCPMC8058346

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.