Tradeoff between enzyme and metabolite efficiency maintains metabolic homeostasis upon perturbations in enzyme capacity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What is the relationship between enzymes and metabolites, the two major constituents of metabolic networks? We propose three alternative relationships between enzyme capacity and metabolite concentration alterations based on a Michaelis-Menten kinetic; that is enzyme capacities, metabolite concentrations, or both could limit the metabolic reaction rates. These relationships imply different correlations between changes in enzyme capacity and metabolite concentration, which we tested by quantifying metabolite, transcript, and enzyme abundances upon local (single-enzyme modulation) and global (GCR2 transcription factor mutant) perturbations in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Our results reveal an inverse relationship between fold-changes in substrate metabolites and their catalyzing enzymes. These data provide evidence for the hypothesis that reaction rates are jointly limited by enzyme capacity and metabolite concentration. Hence, alteration in one network constituent can be efficiently buffered by converse alterations in the other constituent, implying a passive mechanism to maintain metabolic homeostasis upon perturbations in enzyme capacity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".