2023
DOI: 10.3390/ijms24044155
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Knowns and Unknowns in Protein–Metabolite Interactions

Abstract: Increasing attention has been focused on the study of protein–metabolite interactions (PMI), which play a key role in regulating protein functions and directing an orchestra of cellular processes. The investigation of PMIs is complicated by the fact that many such interactions are extremely short-lived, which requires very high resolution in order to detect them. As in the case of protein–protein interactions, protein–metabolite interactions are still not clearly defined. Existing assays for detecting protein–… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 126 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…may serve as a more direct source of omics signals, they are often inaccessible and/or invasive to procure [ 141 , 142 ]. Additionally, none of the studies explicitly considered biomarker interactions (e.g., protein–protein or protein–metabolite) or the possibility of biomarker degradation or metabolism (e.g., considering how TRAP exposure may only affect biomarker levels over a specific temporal window) [ 141 , 143 , 144 , 145 ]. Finally, without the ability to obtain repeated measures of multiple omics types within individuals over relevant periods, it is not possible to directly assess putative relationships between TRAP exposure and cascading biological processes.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…may serve as a more direct source of omics signals, they are often inaccessible and/or invasive to procure [ 141 , 142 ]. Additionally, none of the studies explicitly considered biomarker interactions (e.g., protein–protein or protein–metabolite) or the possibility of biomarker degradation or metabolism (e.g., considering how TRAP exposure may only affect biomarker levels over a specific temporal window) [ 141 , 143 , 144 , 145 ]. Finally, without the ability to obtain repeated measures of multiple omics types within individuals over relevant periods, it is not possible to directly assess putative relationships between TRAP exposure and cascading biological processes.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, more researches have used LC-MS to detect more peaks, but most of the identified metabolites by LC-MS are considerably overlapped with GC-MS except for lipid molecules having large molecular weights. GC-MS has been the most commonly used technique for metabolite profiling because of its hard ionization method which is highly reproducible and easy for metabolite annotation, and it still has been widely applied for metabolite profiling and identification (Baiges-Gaya et al, 2023;Kurbatov et al, 2023;Neag et al, 2023).…”
Section: Metabolome Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…may serve as a more direct source of omics signals, they are often inaccessible and/or invasive to procure [135,136]. Additionally, none of the studies explicitly considered biomarker interactions (e.g., protein-protein or protein-metabolite) or the possibility of biomarker degradation or metabolism (e.g., considering how TRAP exposure may only affect biomarker levels over a specific temporal window) [135,[137][138][139]. Finally, without the ability to obtain repeated measures of multiple omics types within individuals over relevant time periods, it is not possible to directly assess putative relationships between TRAP exposure and cascading biological processes.…”
Section: Biological Matricesmentioning
confidence: 99%