MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PathQuant: A bioinformatic tool to quantitatively annotate the relationship between genes and metabolites through metabolic pathway mapping

2017· article· en· W4297944060 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sandra Therrien-Laperriere, Sara Cherkaoui, G. Boucher, Guillaume Lettre, John D. Rioux, C. Des Rosiers

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKEGGMetabolic pathwayComputational biologyMetaboliteMetabolomicsGeneBiologyGeneticsBioinformaticsBiochemistryGene expressionGene ontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background & Objective The integration of genome wide association studies (GWAS) with metabolomics, termed mGWAS, offers a tremendous opportunity to gain insights into the genetic control of metabolism. A current bottleneck of mGWAS is the biological interpretation of the large amount of generated data, which include associations between SNP‐annotated genes and metabolites. This project aimed at developing a robust bioinformatic package to quantitatively annotate gene‐metabolite association pairs through metabolic pathway mapping. Methods & Results A R package, PathQuant, has been developed following Bioconductor guidelines to ensure reproducibility of results and easy growth. The current version of PathQuant uses as input a list of gene‐metabolite associations pairs and enables: (i) gene classification into enzymatic vs. non‐enzymatic category using the Enzyme Commission number (EC) as annotation; (ii) mapping of metabolic gene‐metabolite pairs on a graph model of human KEGG metabolic pathway maps, where genes are edges and metabolites are nodes, and (iii) calculation of shortest reactional distances between gene‐metabolite pairs with either graphical visualization or textual tables as outputs. As a proof‐of concept, PathQuant was used to map mGWAS gene‐metabolite associations data from Shin et al. (2014) using all KEGG metabolism pathway maps, which include the metabolism reconstruction overview map and specific individual pathway maps. We applied the method for 86 reported associations between 50 enzymatic genes and 66 metabolites measured in plasma. When mapped to KEGG metabolism overview (), these associations are mostly found in “Energy” (purple), “Amino acids” (orange) and “Nucleotides” (green) pathway classes. PathQuant annotated finite numerical distances between 28 genes and 31 metabolites involved in 38 associations of which 36 had a short distance, between 0 and 5, which indicates that the reaction catalyzed by the gene encoded enzyme was not more than 5 reactions apart from that involving its associated metabolite. For 17 genes and 27 metabolites, representing 27 pairs, we were unable to calculate finite numerical distances using PathQuant, which is attributed to current limitations of human KEGG pathway maps, such as (i) missing enzymes annotated in humans creating disconnected subgraphs within the maps, (ii) the presence of a gene and a metabolite from a given pair on different maps and (iii) limited coverage of lipid metabolic diversity in KEGG pathway maps (). While improvement of the tool's capacity for annotation could address limitations (i) and (ii), there were, however, 4 genes and 12 metabolites (21 pairs) that were not present on any KEGG pathways. Conclusion PathQuant provides a high‐throughput approach to link and objectively annotate gene‐metabolite pairs. Future work aims at upgrading PathQuant by refining the annotation and improving coverage of pathway classes by including other pathway databases than KEGG as well as to expand the annotation to genes involved in cell signaling pathways. Support or Funding Information Genome Canada, Genome Québec, Genome British Columbia, Agilent Technologies, CIHR, Crohn's and Colitis Canada, Government of Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and BioproductionFrench-language works237,207