MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306254899 · doi:10.1016/j.mec.2022.e00209

Metabolomics and modelling approaches for systems metabolic engineering

2022· review· en· W4306254899 on OpenAlexaff
Jasmeet Kaur Khanijou, Hanna Kulyk, Cécilia Bergès, Leng Wei Khoo, Pnelope Ng, Hock Chuan Yeo, Mohamed Helmy, Floriant Bellvert, Wee Chew, Kumar Selvarajoo

Bibliographic record

VenueMetabolic Engineering Communications · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsMetabolomicsSystems biologyComputer scienceMetabolic engineeringWorkflowComputational biologyBiochemical engineeringBiological systemBiologyBioinformaticsEngineeringBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metabolic engineering involves the manipulation of microbes to produce desirable compounds through genetic engineering or synthetic biology approaches. Metabolomics involves the quantitation of intracellular and extracellular metabolites, where mass spectrometry and nuclear magnetic resonance based analytical instrumentation are often used. Here, the experimental designs, sample preparations, metabolite quenching and extraction are essential to the quantitative metabolomics workflow. The resultant metabolomics data can then be used with computational modelling approaches, such as kinetic and constraint-based modelling, to better understand underlying mechanisms and bottlenecks in the synthesis of desired compounds, thereby accelerating research through systems metabolic engineering. Constraint-based models, such as genome scale models, have been used successfully to enhance the yield of desired compounds from engineered microbes, however, unlike kinetic or dynamic models, constraint-based models do not incorporate regulatory effects. Nevertheless, the lack of time-series metabolomic data generation has hindered the usefulness of dynamic models till today. In this review, we show that improvements in automation, dynamic real-time analysis and high throughput workflows can drive the generation of more quality data for dynamic models through time-series metabolomics data generation. Spatial metabolomics also has the potential to be used as a complementary approach to conventional metabolomics, as it provides information on the localization of metabolites. However, more effort must be undertaken to identify metabolites from spatial metabolomics data derived through imaging mass spectrometry, where machine learning approaches could prove useful. On the other hand, single-cell metabolomics has also seen rapid growth, where understanding cell-cell heterogeneity can provide more insights into efficient metabolic engineering of microbes. Moving forward, with potential improvements in automation, dynamic real-time analysis, high throughput workflows, and spatial metabolomics, more data can be produced and studied using machine learning algorithms, in conjunction with dynamic models, to generate qualitative and quantitative predictions to advance metabolic engineering efforts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations45
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMetabolic Engineering CommunicationsSame topicMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and BioproductionFrench-language works237,207