Cited by 779Microbial Metabolic Engineering and BioproductionGene Regulatory Network AnalysisBioinformatics and Genomic Networks

Constraining the metabolic genotype–phenotype relationship using a phylogeny of in silico methods

Open access
Lewis, Nathan E., Nagarajan, Harish, Palsson, Bernhard O.·2012·Nature Reviews Microbiology

Abstract

Reconstructed microbial metabolic networks facilitate a mechanistic description of the genotype-phenotype relationship through the deployment of constraint-based reconstruction and analysis (COBRA) methods. As reconstructed networks leverage genomic data for insight and phenotype prediction, the development of COBRA methods has accelerated following the advent of whole-genome sequencing. Here, we describe a phylogeny of COBRA methods that has rapidly evolved from the few early methods, such as flux balance analysis and elementary flux mode analysis, into a repertoire of more than 100 methods. These methods have enabled genome-scale analysis of microbial metabolism for numerous basic and applied uses, including antibiotic discovery, metabolic engineering and modelling of microbial community behaviour.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nrmicro2737

Cites

145 of 145 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lewis, N. E., Nagarajan, H., & Palsson, B. O.
Affiliations
University of California San Diego (US)
Venue
Nature Reviews Microbiology
Published
2012-02-27
Volume
10
Issue
4
Pages
291-305
ISSN
  • 1740-1526 (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-1534
OpenAlex
W2082382448
Cited by
779
References
145
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 51 · 2018: 56 · 2017: 77 · 2016: 71 · 2015: 81 · 2014: 70 · 2013: 67 · 2012: 32
FWCI
7.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM057089)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Microbial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Keywords
genome-scale metabolic modeling, genotype-phenotype correlation, microbial metabolism, flux balance analysis, metabolic networks, antibiotic discovery, metabolic engineering
MeSH terms
Computer Simulation, Energy Metabolism, Escherichia coli, Genotype, Models, Biological, Phenotype, Genome, Bacterial, Genome, Fungal, Buchnera, Metabolic Networks and Pathways, Metabolic Engineering

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review