scispace - formally typeset
D

Dennis Vitkup

Researcher at Columbia University

Publications -  68
Citations -  7524

Dennis Vitkup is an academic researcher from Columbia University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Metabolic network & Gene. The author has an hindex of 36, co-authored 65 publications receiving 6902 citations. Previous affiliations of Dennis Vitkup include Harvard University & Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Analysis of optimality in natural and perturbed metabolic networks

TL;DR: The method of minimization of metabolic adjustment (MOMA), whereby the hypothesis that knockout metabolic fluxes undergo a minimal redistribution with respect to the flux configuration of the wild type is tested, is tested and found to be useful in understanding the evolutionary optimization of metabolism.
Journal ArticleDOI

Rare De Novo Variants Associated with Autism Implicate a Large Functional Network of Genes Involved in Formation and Function of Synapses

TL;DR: This study uses NETBAG to identify a large biological network of genes affected by rare de novo CNVs in autism, which is strongly related to genes previously implicated in autism and intellectual disability phenotypes.
Journal ArticleDOI

Tissue of origin dictates branched-chain amino acid metabolism in mutant Kras-driven cancers

TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that tissue of origin is an important determinant of how cancers satisfy their metabolic requirements, and that tissue context defines cancer dependence on specific metabolic pathways is unknown, but despite the same initiating events, these tumors use branched chain amino acids (BCAAs) differently.
Journal ArticleDOI

Solvent mobility and the protein 'glass' transition.

TL;DR: A novel molecular dynamics simulation procedure with the protein and solvent at different temperatures has been used, showing the essential role of solvent in controlling functionally important protein fluctuations above 180 K.
Journal ArticleDOI

Completeness in structural genomics.

TL;DR: This work evaluates different strategies for optimizing information return on effort and concludes that the strategy that maximizes structural coverage requires about seven times fewer structure determinations compared with the strategy in which targets are selected at random.