CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 198Metabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksGenetic Associations and Epidemiology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mining the Unknown: A Systems Approach to Metabolite Identification Combining Genetic and Metabolic Information

Open access
Krumsiek, Jan, Suhre, Karsten, Evans, Anne M., Mitchell, Matthew W., Mohney, Robert P., Milburn, Michael V., Wägele, Brigitte, Römisch-Margl, Werner, Illig, Thomas, Adamski, Jerzy, Gieger, Christian, Theis, Fabian J., Kastenmüller, Gabi·2012·PLoS Genetics
DOI 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003005PMC PMC3475673
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Recent genome-wide association studies (GWAS) with metabolomics data linked genetic variation in the human genome to differences in individual metabolite levels. A strong relevance of this metabolic individuality for biomedical and pharmaceutical research has been reported. However, a considerable amount of the molecules currently quantified by modern metabolomics techniques are chemically unidentified. The identification of these "unknown metabolites" is still a demanding and intricate task, limiting their usability as functional markers of metabolic processes. As a consequence, previous GWAS largely ignored unknown metabolites as metabolic traits for the analysis. Here we present a systems-level approach that combines genome-wide association analysis and Gaussian graphical modeling with metabolomics to predict the identity of the unknown metabolites. We apply our method to original data of 517 metabolic traits, of which 225 are unknowns, and genotyping information on 655,658 genetic variants, measured in 1,768 human blood samples. We report previously undescribed genotype-metabotype associations for six distinct gene loci (SLC22A2, COMT, CYP3A5, CYP2C18, GBA3, UGT3A1) and one locus not related to any known gene (rs12413935). Overlaying the inferred genetic associations, metabolic networks, and knowledge-based pathway information, we derive testable hypotheses on the biochemical identities of 106 unknown metabolites. As a proof of principle, we experimentally confirm nine concrete predictions. We demonstrate the benefit of our method for the functional interpretation of previous metabolomics biomarker studies on liver detoxification, hypertension, and insulin resistance. Our approach is generic in nature and can be directly transferred to metabolomics data from different experimental platforms.

Overview

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 · 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003005

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Data integration workflow for the systematic classification of unknown metabolites. We combine high-throughput metabolomics and genotyping data in Gaussian graphical models (GGMs) [21] and in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) [5] in order to produce testable predictions of the unknown metabolites' identities. These hypotheses are then subject to experimental verification by mass-spectrometry. Six such cases have been fully worked through and are presented in Table 3.
Figure 1 Data integration workflow for the systematic classification of unknown metabolites. We combine high-throughput metabolomics and genotyping data in Gaussian graphical models (GGMs) [21] and in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) [5] in order to produce testable predictions of the unknown metabolites' identities. These hypotheses are then subject to experimental verification by mass-spectrometry. Six such cases have been fully worked through and are presented in Table 3.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Manhattan plot of genetic association. The strength of association for known (bottom) and unknown (top) metabolites is indicated as the negative logarithm of the p-value for the linear model (see Methods). Only metabolite-SNP associations with p-values below 10−6 are plotted (grey circles). Triangles represent metabolite-SNP associations with p-values below 10−40. Horizontal lines indicate the threshold for genome-wide significance ( = 1.6×10−10 corresponding to α = 0.05 after Bonferroni correction); red vertical dashes indicate loci at which this threshold is attained.
Figure 2 Manhattan plot of genetic association. The strength of association for known (bottom) and unknown (top) metabolites is indicated as the negative logarithm of the p-value for the linear model (see Methods). Only metabolite-SNP associations with p-values below 10−6 are plotted (grey circles). Triangles represent metabolite-SNP associations with p-values below 10−40. Horizontal lines indicate the threshold for genome-wide significance ( = 1.6×10−10 corresponding to α = 0.05 after Bonferroni correction); red vertical dashes indicate loci at which this threshold is attained.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Gaussian graphical modeling. GGMs embed unknown metabolites into their biochemical context. A: Complete network presentation of partial correlations that are significantly different from zero at α = 0.05 after Bonferroni correction. The unknown metabolites are spread over the entire network and are involved in various metabolic pathways. B–D: Selected high-scoring sub-networks. We observe that GGM edges directly correspond to chemical reactions which alter specific chemical groups (e.g. carbonyl groups and methyl groups). Solid lines denote positive partial correlation. Dashed lines indicate negative partial correlations. Line widths represent partial correlation strengths.
Figure 3 Gaussian graphical modeling. GGMs embed unknown metabolites into their biochemical context. A: Complete network presentation of partial correlations that are significantly different from zero at α = 0.05 after Bonferroni correction. The unknown metabolites are spread over the entire network and are involved in various metabolic pathways. B–D: Selected high-scoring sub-networks. We observe that GGM edges directly correspond to chemical reactions which alter specific chemical groups (e.g. carbonyl groups and methyl groups). Solid lines denote positive partial correlation. Dashed lines indicate negative partial correlations. Line widths represent partial correlation strengths.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Semi-automatic prediction of unknown metabolite identities. A: Examples of how to determine pathway classifications based on the functional annotations of GGM and GWAS hits. We present two metabolites, X-11421 and X-11244, whose GGM and GWAS associations clearly point into carnitine and steroid metabolism, respectively. B: Overview of unknowns functionally annotated by both GGMs and the GWAS approach. ‘GGM’ refers to an unknown metabolite which is three or less steps away from a known metabolite in the GGM, whereas ‘direct GGM’ represents direct neighbors in the network. C: Pathway predictions for the 16 unknowns with both direct GGM and GWAs annotations. Unknowns marked with a star were subjected to in-depth analysis followed by experimental validation in the following.
Figure 4 Semi-automatic prediction of unknown metabolite identities. A: Examples of how to determine pathway classifications based on the functional annotations of GGM and GWAS hits. We present two metabolites, X-11421 and X-11244, whose GGM and GWAS associations clearly point into carnitine and steroid metabolism, respectively. B: Overview of unknowns functionally annotated by both GGMs and the GWAS approach. ‘GGM’ refers to an unknown metabolite which is three or less steps away from a known metabolite in the GGM, whereas ‘direct GGM’ represents direct neighbors in the network. C: Pathway predictions for the 16 unknowns with both direct GGM and GWAs annotations. Unknowns marked with a star were subjected to in-depth analysis followed by experimental validation in the following.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 Detailed investigation of three scenarios (DIPEPTIDE, STEROID, and HETE). In order to generate concrete hypotheses on the unknowns' identities, we assembled all available information for each scenario. This includes biochemical edges from the GGM, genetic associations from the GWAS, pathway annotations as well as mass information. For details of the predicted identities, see Table 3 and main text. Similar figures for three further scenarios (CARNITINE, BILIRUBIN, and ASCORBATE) are available in Text S3.
Figure 5 Detailed investigation of three scenarios (DIPEPTIDE, STEROID, and HETE). In order to generate concrete hypotheses on the unknowns' identities, we assembled all available information for each scenario. This includes biochemical edges from the GGM, genetic associations from the GWAS, pathway annotations as well as mass information. For details of the predicted identities, see Table 3 and main text. Similar figures for three further scenarios (CARNITINE, BILIRUBIN, and ASCORBATE) are available in Text S3.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6 Experimental confirmation of X-14208 as phenylalanylserine. Two possible dipeptide variants were predicted and consequently tested. The fragmentation spectrum of the 253.1 m/z ion (positive mode) of the pure Phe-Ser matches that of the unknown compound, whereas the spectrum for pure Ser-Phe differs visibly. Moreover, the retention index (RI) of Phe-Ser is similar to the RI of X-14208, whereas that of Ser-Phe is significantly different.
Figure 6 Experimental confirmation of X-14208 as phenylalanylserine. Two possible dipeptide variants were predicted and consequently tested. The fragmentation spectrum of the 253.1 m/z ion (positive mode) of the pure Phe-Ser matches that of the unknown compound, whereas the spectrum for pure Ser-Phe differs visibly. Moreover, the retention index (RI) of Phe-Ser is similar to the RI of X-14208, whereas that of Ser-Phe is significantly different.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 198

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Krumsiek, J., Suhre, K., Evans, A. M., Mitchell, M. W., Mohney, R. P., Milburn, M. V., Wägele, B., Römisch-Margl, W., Illig, T., Adamski, J., Gieger, C., Theis, F. J., & Kastenmüller, G.
Affiliations
  • Helmholtz Munich (DE)
  • Metabolon (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Kastenmüller, Gabi
ORCID
Venue
PLoS Genetics
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2012-10-18
Volume
8
Issue
10
Pages
e1003005
ISSN
  • 1553-7390 (ISSN-L)
  • 1553-7404
DOI
10.1371/journal.pgen.1003005
PMC
PMC3475673
OpenAlex
W2080426060
Cited by
197
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS Genetics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Site cant be reached (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Qatar Foundation
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (0315494A, 03IS2061B)
  • Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Metabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
Keywords
genome-wide association study, metabolic networks, SLC22A2, catechol-O-methyltransferase, CYP3A5, CYP2C18, liver detoxification, hypertension, insulin resistance, blood metabolites, systems biology
MeSH terms
Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Models, Statistical, Signal Transduction, Computational Biology, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Genomics, Genome-Wide Association Study, Metabolomics, Metabolome, Data Mining

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