Back

RMetD2: a tool for integration of relative transcriptomics data into Genome-scale metabolic models

Zhang, C.; Lee, S.; Bidkhori, G.; Benfe, R.; Lovric, A.; Chen, S.; Uhlen, M.; Nielsen, J.; Mardinoglu, A.

2019-06-06 bioinformatics
10.1101/663096 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Relative Metabolic Differences version 2 (RMetD2) is a tool for integration of differentially expressed (DE) genes into genome-scale metabolic models (GEMs) for revealing the altered metabolism between two biological conditions. This method provides a robust evaluation of the metabolism by using flux ranges instead of a single set of flux distributions. RMetD2 classifies reactions into three different groups, namely up-regulated, down-regulated and unchanged, which enables systematic interpretation of the metabolic differences between two different conditions. We employed this method in three different case studies using mice and human datasets, and compared it with state-of-the-art methods used for studying condition-specific metabolic differences using GEMs. We observed that RMetD2 is capable of capturing experimentally-observed features that are missed by other methods, highlighting its potential use in biotechnology and systems medicine applications. RMetD2 is implemented in Matlab and it is available without any limitation at https://sourceforge.net/projects/rmetd.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 1%
18.4%
Similar papers in this journal
2
BMC Bioinformatics
○ 457 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
12.6%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Bioinformatics
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 2%
11.0%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Metabolites
○ 53 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
5.5%
Similar papers in this journal
50% of probability mass above
6
Briefings in Bioinformatics
◐ 354 papers in training set
Top 2%
5.5%
7
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 30%
4.8%
8
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 25%
4.0%
9
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
○ 494 papers in training set
Top 4%
3.2%
10
npj Systems Biology and Applications
○ 125 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.4%
11
Computers in Biology and Medicine
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
12
Computational Biology and Chemistry
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
13
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
◐ 242 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
14
Genes
○ 144 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
15
BMC Genomics
○ 406 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.1%
16
Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics
188 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
17
Bioinformatics Advances
◐ 203 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
18
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
○ 102 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
19
Journal of Computational Biology
○ 48 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.0%
20
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics
● 38 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
21
Metabolic Engineering
○ 75 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
22
Nucleic Acids Research
◐ 1281 papers in training set
Top 15%
0.6%
23
GigaScience
◐ 212 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.