↓ Skip to main content

Metabolic Network Discovery by Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches and Paths for Reconciliation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Metabolic Network Discovery by Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches and Paths for Reconciliation
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, December 2014
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2014.00062
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tunahan Çakır, Mohammad Jafar Khatibipour

Abstract

The primary focus in the network-centric analysis of cellular metabolism by systems biology approaches is to identify the active metabolic network for the condition of interest. Two major approaches are available for the discovery of the condition-specific metabolic networks. One approach starts from genome-scale metabolic networks, which cover all possible reactions known to occur in the related organism in a condition-independent manner, and applies methods such as the optimization-based Flux-Balance Analysis to elucidate the active network. The other approach starts from the condition-specific metabolome data, and processes the data with statistical or optimization-based methods to extract information content of the data such that the active network is inferred. These approaches, termed bottom-up and top-down, respectively, are currently employed independently. However, considering that both approaches have the same goal, they can both benefit from each other paving the way for the novel integrative analysis methods of metabolome data- and flux-analysis approaches in the post-genomic era. This study reviews the strengths of constraint-based analysis and network inference methods reported in the metabolic systems biology field; then elaborates on the potential paths to reconcile the two approaches to shed better light on how the metabolism functions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
India 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Singapore 1 1%
Unknown 95 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 20%
Student > Master 20 20%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Professor 5 5%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 14 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 25 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 24%
Computer Science 8 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 7%
Engineering 6 6%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 15 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 December 2014.
All research outputs
#18,385,510
of 22,772,779 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#3,381
of 6,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#261,380
of 360,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#26
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,772,779 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,524 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 360,895 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.