ArticleArXiv2026
Rethinking the Choice Behavior of Sugar Metabolism in Bacteria.
Article in ArXiv, 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Ramkrishna, Kompala, and Tsao proposed the cybernetic model of microbial growth, in which cells allocate enzyme synthesis resources according to a matching rule that mimics rational decision-making. The matching rule was later shown to be optimal under general assumptions about the underlying return-on-investment structure, yet the specific objective the cell maximizes and the constraints bounding that choice were never written down as an explicit economic decision. Here we supply that missing decision, recasting cybernetic enzyme-synthesis control as a consumer choice problem from microeconomic theory: the cell allocates a limited proteome budget among competing catabolic enzymes as a linear program (LP), maximizing a linear growth utility subject to a linear proteome budget constraint. Because the utility is linear, the LP's solution is geometric: whenever the iso-utility line's slope differs from the budget constraint's, the optimum is a corner, and the entire proteome budget is allocated to the enzyme for the single most profitable substrate. Corner solutions correspond to diauxic growth, and sequential substrate consumption follows from the choice of corner rather than a distinct regulatory mechanism. Only when the two slopes coincide does the optimum spread across the entire budget line instead of concentrating at a single corner; this degenerate case is where simultaneous substrate use becomes admissible. Using kinetic parameters from single-substrate experiments together with a small set of model-level parameters set in this study, the LP-derived cybernetic variables reproduced the diauxic and triauxic batch growth of
Identifiers
42465806PMC13370590What 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.