Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37908558›Full record

ArticleSynthetic biology (Oxford, England)2023

Rewiring cell-free metabolic flux in

Jaime Lorenzo N Dinglasan, Mitchel J Doktycz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Synthetic biology (Oxford, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jaime Lorenzo N DinglasanBiosciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, USA.
Mitchel J DoktyczBiosciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4856-8343
Oak Ridge National Laboratory · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cell-free systems can expedite the design and implementation of biomanufacturing processes by bypassing troublesome requirements associated with the use of live cells. In particular, the lack of survival objectives and the open nature of cell-free reactions afford engineering approaches that allow purposeful direction of metabolic flux. The use of lysate-based systems to produce desired small molecules can result in competitive titers and productivities when compared to their cell-based counterparts. However, pathway crosstalk within endogenous lysate metabolism can compromise conversion yields by diverting carbon flow away from desired products. Here, the 'block-push-pull' concept of conventional cell-based metabolic engineering was adapted to develop a cell-free approach that efficiently directs carbon flow in lysates from glucose and toward endogenous ethanol synthesis. The approach is readily adaptable, is relatively rapid and allows for the manipulation of central metabolism in cell extracts. In implementing this approach, a block strategy is first optimized, enabling selective enzyme removal from the lysate to the point of eliminating by-product-forming activity while channeling flux through the target pathway. This is complemented with cell-free metabolic engineering methods that manipulate the lysate proteome and reaction environment to push through bottlenecks and pull flux toward ethanol. The approach incorporating these block, push and pull strategies maximized the glucose-to-ethanol conversion in an

Indexed as

biotransformationblock—push—pulllysate-based, cell-free metabolic engineeringmaximum yield

Identifiers

PMID37908558
PMCPMC10615139
OpenAlexW4366086502

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.