Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35404953›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2022

Validation-based model selection for 13C metabolic flux analysis with uncertain measurement errors.

Nicolas Sundqvist, Nina Grankvist, Jeramie Watrous, Jain Mohit, Roland Nilsson, Gunnar Cedersund

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. One-shotMolecular systems biology · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

6 authors.

Nicolas SundqvistLinköping's University, Department of Biomedical engineering, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-1906-7198
Nina GrankvistCardiovascular Medicine Unit, Department of Medicine (Solna), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-3111-4575
Jeramie WatrousDepartment of Medicine & Pharmacology, University of California, San Diego, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9124-6783
Jain MohitDepartment of Medicine & Pharmacology, University of California, San Diego, California, United States of America.
Roland NilssonCardiovascular Medicine Unit, Department of Medicine (Solna), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-6020-7498
Gunnar CedersundLinköping's University, Department of Biomedical engineering, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-9386-0568

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate measurements of metabolic fluxes in living cells are central to metabolism research and metabolic engineering. The gold standard method is model-based metabolic flux analysis (MFA), where fluxes are estimated indirectly from mass isotopomer data with the use of a mathematical model of the metabolic network. A critical step in MFA is model selection: choosing what compartments, metabolites, and reactions to include in the metabolic network model. Model selection is often done informally during the modelling process, based on the same data that is used for model fitting (estimation data). This can lead to either overly complex models (overfitting) or too simple ones (underfitting), in both cases resulting in poor flux estimates. Here, we propose a method for model selection based on independent validation data. We demonstrate in simulation studies that this method consistently chooses the correct model in a way that is independent on errors in measurement uncertainty. This independence is beneficial, since estimating the true magnitude of these errors can be difficult. In contrast, commonly used model selection methods based on the χ2-test choose different model structures depending on the believed measurement uncertainty; this can lead to errors in flux estimates, especially when the magnitude of the error is substantially off. We present a new approach for quantification of prediction uncertainty of mass isotopomer distributions in other labelling experiments, to check for problems with too much or too little novelty in the validation data. Finally, in an isotope tracing study on human mammary epithelial cells, the validation-based model selection method identified pyruvate carboxylase as a key model component. Our results argue that validation-based model selection should be an integral part of MFA model development.

Indexed as

Metabolic Flux AnalysisModels, BiologicalCarbon IsotopesHumansIsotope LabelingUncertaintyCarbon-13Carbon Isotopes

Identifiers

PMID35404953
PMCPMC9022838

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.