Metabolome analysis for investigating host-gut microbiota interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dysbiosis of the gut microbiome is associated with host health conditions. Many diseases have shown to have correlations with imbalanced microbiota, including obesity, inflammatory bowel disease, cancer, and even neurodegeneration disorders. Metabolomics studies targeting small molecule metabolites that impact the host metabolome and their biochemical functions have shown promise for studying host-gut microbiota interactions. Metabolome analysis determines the metabolites being discussed for their biological implications in host-gut microbiota interactions. To facilitate understanding the critical aspects of metabolome analysis, this article reviewed (1) the sample types used in host-gut microbiome studies; (2) mass spectrometry (MS)-based analytical methods and (3) useful tools for MS-based data processing/analysis. In addition to the most frequently used sample type, feces, we also discussed others biosamples, such as urine, plasma/serum, saliva, cerebrospinal fluid, exhaled breaths, and tissues, to better understand gut metabolite systemic effects on the whole organism. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS), and capillary electrophoresis-mass spectrometry (CE-MS), three powerful tools that can be utilized to study host-gut microbiota interactions, are included with examples of their applications. After obtaining big data from MS-based instruments, noise removal, peak detection, missing value imputation, and data analysis are all important steps for acquiring valid results in host-gut microbiome research. The information provided in this review will help new researchers aiming to join this field by providing a global view of the analytical aspects involved in gut microbiota-related metabolomics studies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".