4.6 Article

A systems biology approach to study glucose repression in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae

期刊

BIOTECHNOLOGY AND BIOENGINEERING
卷 96, 期 1, 页码 134-145

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/bit.21135

关键词

carbon catabolite repression; transcription analysis; integrative analysis; PCA; reporter metabolites; signal transduction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glucose repression in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae has evolved as a complex regulatory system involving several different pathways. There are two main pathways involved in signal transduction. One has a role in glucose sensing and regulation of glucose transport, while another takes part in repression of a wide range of genes involved in utilization of alternative carbon sources. In this work, we applied a systems biology approach to study the interaction between these two pathways. Through genome-wide transcription analysis of strains with disruption of HXK2, GRR1, MIG1, the combination of MIG1 and MIG2, and the parental strain, we identified 393 genes to have significantly changed expression levels. To identify co-regulation patterns in the different strains we applied principal component analysis. Disruption of either GRR1 or HXK2 were both found to have profound effects on transcription of genes related to TCA cycle and respiration, as well as ATP synthesis coupled proton transport, all displaying an increased expression. The hxk2 Delta strain showed reduced overflow metabolism towards ethanol relative to the parental strain. We also used a genome-scale metabolic model to identify reported metabolites, and found that there is a high degree of consistency between the identified reporter metabolites and the physiological effects observed in the different mutants. Our systems biology approach points to close interaction between the two pathways, and our metabolism driven analysis of transcription data may find a wider application for analysis of cross-talk between different pathways involved in regulation of metabolism.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据