Table 1.
Fold change for top over expressed proteins per time point.
Table 2.
Number of reactions catalyzed by essential enzymes according to [7] carrying zero flux.
Table 3.
Comparison of the MSEP for the proposed method and the E-flux method.
Fig 1.
Mean squared error of prediction for the proposed method and the E-flux method for three experimental conditions.
The use of proteomics data to define objective functions in FBA yields lower predicion errors.
Table 4.
Number of reactions with large flux variability for the proposed proteomics objective function and the E-flux method.
Fig 2.
Comparison of flux variability between the proposed method and the E-flux method for all experimental conditions (individual replicates).
The use of proteomics data to define objective functions in FBA yields lower mean flux variability due to alternative optimal solutions.
Fig 3.
Logarithm of fold change of metabolic flux for mefloquine to control condition.