Integration of lipidomics and transcriptomics data towards a systems biology model of sphingolipid metabolism
 Shakti Gupta^{1},
 Mano R Maurya^{1},
 Alfred H Merrill Jr^{2},
 Christopher K Glass^{3} and
 Shankar Subramaniam^{1, 3, 4}Email author
DOI: 10.1186/17520509526
© Gupta et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2011
Received: 18 August 2010
Accepted: 8 February 2011
Published: 8 February 2011
Abstract
Background
Sphingolipids play important roles in cell structure and function as well as in the pathophysiology of many diseases. Many of the intermediates of sphingolipid biosynthesis are highly bioactive and sometimes have antagonistic activities, for example, ceramide promotes apoptosis whereas sphingosine1phosphate can inhibit apoptosis and induce cell growth; therefore, quantification of the metabolites and modeling of the sphingolipid network is imperative for an understanding of sphingolipid biology.
Results
In this direction, the LIPID MAPS Consortium is developing methods to quantitate the sphingolipid metabolites in mammalian cells and is investigating their application to studies of the activation of the RAW264.7 macrophage cell by a chemically defined endotoxin, Kdo_{2}Lipid A. Herein, we describe a model for the C_{16}branch of sphingolipid metabolism (i.e., for ceramides with palmitate as the Nacyllinked fatty acid, which is selected because it is a major subspecies for all categories of complex sphingolipids in RAW264.7 cells) integrating lipidomics and transcriptomics data and using a twostep matrixbased approach to estimate the rate constants from experimental data. The rate constants obtained from the first step are further refined using generalized constrained nonlinear optimization. The resulting model fits the experimental data for all species. The robustness of the model is validated through parametric sensitivity analysis.
Conclusions
A quantitative model of the sphigolipid pathway is developed by integrating metabolomics and transcriptomics data with legacy knowledge. The model could be used to design experimental studies of how genetic and pharmacological perturbations alter the flux through this important lipid biosynthetic pathway.
Background
Sphingolipids (SL) are categorized as lipids with a sphingoid base backbone [1] that is often derivatized with an amidelinked fatty acid to make ceramides (Cer) and more structurally complex SL with diverse biological functions [2]. SL in essentially every subcategory, from the lipid backbones [3] to complex SL [4], are highly bioactive and play important roles in diseases [5, 6]; hence, methods for "lipidomic" analysis of SL and SL metabolism are important for an indepth understanding of these enigmatic compounds. In recent years, a number of largescale experimental and bioinformatics projects have begun to address the complexity of the lipidome. Examples include the Lipid Metabolites and Pathways Strategy (LIPID MAPS) Consortium [7], The Lipid Library [8], CYBERLIPID CENTER [9] and LipidBank [10]. In particular, LIPID MAPS has become a comprehensive resource for information on classification, structures and quantitative data on lipids and provides an opportunity for developing quantitative models of lipid synthesis and metabolism thus facilitating a mechanistic and systemslevel understanding.
The de novo biosynthesis of SL begins with production of the sphingoid base, which utilizes serine and palmitoylcoenzyme A (CoA) and various fatty acylCoAs to make Nacylsphinganines (dihydroceramides, DHCer) that are desaturated to Cer (Nacylsphingosines) and incorporated into more complex SL such as ceramide 1phosphate (CerP), sphingomyelin (SM), glucosyl and galactosylceramide (GlcCer and GalCer) and more complex glycosphingolipids [2, 11]. Ceramide can also be synthesized by recycling of sphingosine from turnover of SL such as SM [11, 12]; furthermore, sphingosine and sphinganine are phosphorylated to sphingosine 1phosphate (S1P) and sphinganine 1phosphate (DHSph1P) which are intermediates of sphingoid base degradation [13] and cell signaling molecules [14].
Due to the complexity of this pathway, and the paucity of data for its many metabolites, there are only a few models of SL metabolism available in the literature [15–18]. The LIPID MAPS Consortium [7] has quantified the global changes in lipid metabolites and genes in RAW 264.7 macrophage cells treated with Kdo_{2}Lipid A (KLA). KLA is the active component of inflammatory lipopolysaccharide which functions as a selective agonist of Tolllike receptor 4 (TLR4) and mimics bacterial infection. The measurements are carried out over a 24hour time period and the data is freely available via the LIPID MAPS website [7]. The goal of the work presented here is to develop a predictive kinetic model for SL metabolism using the lipidomics and transcriptomics data from the LIPID MAPS studies. This manuscript is organized as follows: we first briefly discuss the experimental data preprocessing and the methodology used for estimating the rate parameters, then we present the results of parameter estimation, followed by discussion and conclusions.
Methods
Network simplification
Experimental data and preprocessing
The LIPID MAPS Consortium has measured all the major lipids in mouse macrophage RAW 264.7 cells grown in 10% serum and treated with KLA. All metabolites were measured in pmol/μgDNA units. The timecourses of lipids and genes were measured under two conditions: (a) normal condition designated as control and (b) inflamed condition (stimulation by KLA). Time series comprising of 8 data points at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hr were measured with three biological replicates consisting of three technical replicates each. The three technical replicate experiments were performed on the same day with a single batch of cells. In addition, each time course was repeated three times on different days with different batches of cells (biological replicates). For kinetic modeling purposes, outlier points were detected by a ttest and were excluded at each timepoint. The resulting data from all the replicates were averaged at each timepoint. Data was processed for all metabolites under the treatment with KLA and control conditions.
Serine palmitoyltransferase activity in vitro was determined using the assay conditions described previously [22] but with [U^{13}C]palmitoylCoA as the labeled substrate. After extraction of the products, the amounts of [^{13}C]3ketosphinganine were determined by liquid chromatography, electrosprayionization tandem mass spectrometry [23]. The assay was conducted using 100 μg of protein obtained by sonication of RAW264.7 cells in the buffer used for the assay.
Development of a kinetic model and parameter estimation
The estimated values of the rate parameters in the model of sphingolipid metabolism.
No.  Reactions  Parameter Names  Values 

1  DHSph + CoA16 + CerS6 → C_{16} DHCer  k_{f1}  1.30E+01 ± 1.01E02 
2  DHSph + CoA16 → C_{16} DHCer  k_{f2}  5.62E02 ± 1.30E02 
3  C_{16} DHCer →  k_{f3}  1.11E03 ± 3.20E03 
4  DHSph + Sphk1 → DHSph1P  k_{f4}  1.49E04 ± 1.11E03 
5  DHSph + Sphk2 → DHSph1P  k_{f5}  1.61E02 ± 8.38E04 
6  DHSph1P →  k_{f6}  5.28E01 ± 1.83E02 
7  C_{16} DHCer + Ugcg → C_{16} DHGlcCer  k_{f7}  1.81E02 ± 2.71E03 
8  C_{16} DHGlcCer →  k_{f8}  2.99E01 ± 3.25E02 
9  C_{16} DHCer + Sms1 + C_{16} GPCho ←→  k_{f9}  1.15E01 ± 6.85E03 
C_{16} DHSM + Sms1 + C_{16} DG  k_{b9}  1.7176 ± 5.47E03  
10  C_{16} DHCer + Sms2 + C_{16} GPCho ←→  k_{f10}  3.88E01 ± 1.02E02 
C_{16} DHSM + Sms2 + C_{16} DG  k_{b10}  8.63E01 ± 1.23E02  
11  C_{16} DHSM + Smpd1 → C_{16} DHCer  k_{f11}  1.07E01 ± 5.62E03 
12  C_{16} DHSM →  k_{f12}  2.49E02 ± 3.01E03 
13  C_{16} DHCer + Cerk → C_{16} DHCerP  k_{f13}  5.00E05 ± 7.20E06 
14  C_{16} DHCerP →  k_{f14}  8.25E02 ± 6.57E03 
15  C_{16} DHCer + Degs1 → C_{16} Cer  k_{f15}  9.07E03 ± 9.56E03 
16  C_{16} DHCer → C_{16} Cer  k_{f16}  8.03E01 ± 1.39E02 
17  C_{16} Cer + Cerk → C_{16} CerP  k_{f17}  1.29E04 ± 7.64E06 
18  C_{16} CerP →  k_{f18}  1.12E01 ± 4.05E03 
19  C_{16} Cer + Sms1 + C_{16} GPCho ←→  k_{f19}  6.50E02 ± 3.13E02 
C_{16} SM + Sms1 + C_{16} DG  k_{b19}  4.72E02 ± 8.67E03  
20  C_{16} Cer + Sms2 + C_{16} GPCho ←→  k_{f20}  4.48E01 ± 2.50E02 
C_{16} SM + Sms2 + C_{16} DG  k_{b20}  1.3343 ± 2.52E02  
21  C_{16} SM + Smpd1 → C_{16} Cer  k_{f21}  1.91E05 ± 1.98E02 
22  C_{16} SM →  k_{f22}  9.79E03 ± 1.28E03 
23  C_{16} Cer →  k_{f23}  0.00E+00 ± 2.55E03 
24  C_{16} Cer + Ugcg → C_{16} GlcCer  k_{f24}  2.39E02 ± 3.05E03 
25  C_{16} GlcCer →  k_{f25}  4.58E03 ± 3.43E03 
where the rate constants k_{ i } (i = f4, f5, f6, f7, f8) are as defined in Table 1.
where, nt is the number of timepoints and nsp is the number of species.
The initial concentrations of the metabolites were also optimized in a narrow range around the experimental values. When data on more than one condition was available, then all the data was used to compute the fiterror by simulating the model several times individually and minimizing the objective function collectively.
Estimation of uncertainty in the optimized parameters
 1.
Compute the SEM in the lipid and gene data at each time point (Additional file 1 Table S1b).
 2.
Create a candidate data set for parameter estimation by generating nsp x m random matrix utilizing the normal distribution, scale it with the corresponding SEM and add the scaledvalue matrix to the meanvalue data on lipids and genes (Additional file 1 Table S1a).
 3.
Estimate the parameters using the candidate data set thus producing a one parametervalue set.
 4.
Repeat steps 23 k times to generate k parametervalue sets (k = 10 in our simulation).
 5.
Compute the SEM for each parameter across the k sets.
Results
Fit to experimental data
There were two problems in the optimization of parameters: (1) the wide range of metabolite concentrations, and (2) irregular time intervals (longer intervals at later times). The concentration of metabolites varied between 0.01 pmol/μg DNA (for C_{16} DHCerP) and 700 pmol/μg DNA (for C_{16} SM). Due to the orders of magnitude difference in the metabolite concentrations, the fits were biased towards metabolites with high concentration and resulted in a poor fit for the metabolites with lower concentrations. To resolve this issue, the experimental values and predicted values for each metabolite were scaled/normalized by its maximum experimental value. Then, the sum of squares of the normalized fiterror on all metabolites was minimized. This scaling, essentially, normalized the maximum experimental concentrations to 1 for all metabolites and resulted in approximately equal weight for all metabolites. Further, the data measured at irregular time intervals (12 hr difference in last two measurements) also created a problem in optimization and led to relatively poor fit at later time points. From parameterestimation viewpoint, the measurements should be made at equal intervals so that equal weight is assigned to the entire timecourse. To account for this, the pointwiseerror was scaled by the 1/4 power of the length of the corresponding timeinterval, resulting in a higher weight for later time points. Consequently, the quality of fit for the later timepoints was improved. For most time points, the difference between the predicted and experimental data was within the standarderror of mean (Figure 2). The good fit was obtained for all metabolites under both treatment and control conditions.
Parametric sensitivity and timescale analysis
Uncertainty analysis on the parameters: The SEM of the parameters is calculated as described in the Methods section and the results are reported in Table 1. Overall, the parameters are wellbehaved and the parameterestimation procedure is reliable because the fractional SEM for the lipid and gene data and the fractional SEM for most of the parameters are of the same order (2030%).
Results of eigenvalue based timescale analysis of the metabolites.
Fast (~1 hr)  Medium (~10 hr)  Slow (~100 hr) 

C_{16} DHCer  DHSph1P  C_{16} SM 
C_{16} Cer  C_{16} DHGlcCer  C_{16} GlcCer 
C_{16} DHSM  
C_{16} DHCerP  
C_{16} CerP 
Discussion
This study has used the large data sets from mass spectrometric measurements of the SL and the microarray data of the mRNAs of RAW264.7 cells generated by the LIPID MAPS Consortium to evaluate a model for SL metabolism.
Importance of including the transcriptomics data and the data on fatty acylCoA
In this study, we have included the microarray data for the lipidrelated genes using a timedelay of threehours to account for the time for mRNA translation and protein translocation. The use of mRNA data for kinetic modeling was motivated by good correlations between specific genes and its metabolic products in the sphingolipid pathway [27]. In general, protein levels follow the qualitative profile of mRNA with appropriate timedelays. However, we note the potential caveat that the protein levels for some proteins may not be even qualitatively similar to the transcriptional levels of their genes. The discrepancy of mismatch between the mRNA and protein profiles can arise due to several factors such as dependence of mRNA translation on ribosome binding site (RBS) sequences, post translational modification of the protein, protein translocation and its stability. This may introduce errors in the estimated values of the kinetic parameters.
To delineate the importance of the transcriptional data, we first developed the mathematical model without using the gene/protein data. The rate parameters were estimated using the lipidomics data alone. We visualized the fit to experimental data (equivalent of the plots shown in Figure 2; data not shown). A reasonable fit was obtained for all metabolites except C_{16}DHCer. To resolve disagreement in the shape of DHCer, we identified the reactions in which these lipids were consumed or produced. We also analyzed the timecourse of the mRNA levels for the genes related to these reactions. Most of the genes exhibited differential regulation at later time points (i.e., the ratio of data with KLA treatment to control being significantly different from 1). Among several differentially regulated genes, the prominent were CerS6 (reaction 1), Smpd1 (reactions 9 and 17), Degs1 (reaction 13) and Ugcg (reaction 20). The upregulation and involvement of CerS6 in the production of DHCer suggested that the gene data must be included in the network to capture the DHCer dynamics. After adding the gene data with delay, we observed substantial improvement in the fit to the experimental data for DHCer (Figure 2).
The profile of palmitoylCoA16 also increases monotonically during 024 hrs (Additional file 1 Figure S1). Even though [DHSph] increases till 4 hr and comes back to control level at 24 hr, the influx to DHCer is maintained throughout 024 hr because of increase in palmitoylCoA and CerS6 at later time points. Due to this reason, DHCer shows a monotonically increasing profile during 024 hr. Thus, the profiles of CerS6 and palmitoylCoA are important to obtain a good fit on DHCer.
Rate parameters for the enzymes
We compared the combined rate constant for the enzymes CerS5/CerS6 (pmol/hr/μgDNA) with an estimation of the maximum flux through the de novo biosynthetic pathway based on the activity of serine palmitoyltransferase assayed in vitro with optimal concentrations of substrates, which was 30 + 1 pmole/min/mg protein for control (unstimulated) RAW264.7 cells. To convert the estimated values to the same units, we used estimations (by measurement) for the relationships between DNA, cell number and protein amount of ~3 μg DNA/10^{6} RAW264.7 cells, and 10^{6} cells have ~0.25 mg protein. Thus, the computed value for C16SL biosynthesis by CerS5/CerS6 is ~1 pmol/min/mg protein, which is about one order of magnitude lower than the theoretical maximum rate of sphinganine production by the cells. This might mean that the calculated value is low due to inaccuracies in some of the modeling approximations, including the use of linear kinetics instead of MichaelisMenten kinetics; however, the differences might be real because serine palmitoyltransferase has usually not been found to be operating at V_{max} because its substrates are not saturating [28, 29] and other CerS also contribute to the utilization of the sphinganine that is produced de novo. In addition, sphinganine and sphinganine 1phosphate are elevated to some extent in RAW264.7 cells, which implies that CerSs are not trapping all of the sphinganine that is made.
Similarity in the rate parameters for same gene/enzyme involved in different reactions
Consideration of different chainlengths
C_{16} sphingolipids are used in this model because (1) these are present in higher amounts than the SL of larger chainlengths, and (2) they showed significant differences between the treatment and control experiments in response to KLA. We can extend our model to include the metabolites with higher chainlengths (e.g. C_{18}, C_{20}, C_{22} and C_{24}). The reactions in the existing model (C_{16}based) will serve as a template that can be instantiated for higher chainlengths. To estimate the rate parameters for the entire model, the parameters for the C_{16}based model can provide bounds for the rate parameters in the overall model for the similar types of reactions. For example, the rate constants for the reactions C_{n} DHCer → C_{n} DHGlcCer (where n = 18, 20, 22 and 24), can be constrained with a factor of 0.5 to 2 of the rate constant for the reaction C_{16} DHCer → C_{16} DHGlcCer in the model developed here.
Use of the model for insilico perturbation experiments
The model can be used to perform knockdown (KD) or other perturbation experiments insilico. Such computational studies provide useful insights into the behavior of the system which can add in designing the actual perturbation experiments. These simulations can assist in finding the propagation of the effects of KD in the network and lead to a better design of experiments (e.g. when the measurements should be made). Simulation can also suggest whether a high level of KD is needed such that the differences between the KD and control scenarios would be statistically significant. The data generated from new perturbation experiments can be used to further refine the model. For the enzymes, the KD perturbations can be simulated by decreasing the corresponding rate parameter because amount of the (active) enzyme directly affects the rate parameters. The KD perturbation simulation results will be similar to the sensitivity analysis results on the corresponding rate parameter. For example, the effect of 50% KD of the enzyme for the reaction 16 (Figure 1 Degs2), can be predicted from the simulation for sensitivity analysis in which the value of the parameter k_{f16} is reduced by 50% (Figure 3).
The case of knockdown of Cerk (cermide kinase) is also interesting due to its direct effect on Ceramide1phosphate (CerP) which inhibits apoptosis and induces cell growth [30]. The result of sensitivity analysis for the corresponding rate parameter, k_{f17} (C_{16} Cer + Cerk → C_{16} CerP), is shown in Additional file 1 Figure S2. Decrease in k_{f17} results in a corresponding decrease in the CerP level. These changes have also been observed in recent experiments validating our parametric sensitivity analysis and the predictive ability of the model [31]. CerP has also been implicated in regulating the homeostasis of calcium [32] thereby affecting the activity of several signaling pathways. CerP and Cerk mediate the effect of cytokines to activate cytosolic phospholipase A2 (cPLA_{2}) and cyclooxygenase 2 (COX2), resulting in increased production of prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), a mediator of inflammation [33]. Hence, it has been hypothesized that Cerk could be a potential target for antiinflammatory drugs [34, 35].
Conclusion
Use of systems biology approaches is becoming more common in the study of lipids to elucidate their functions and roles in human health and diseases such as arthritis and cancer. Systems biology has already been recognized as an indispensable tool in pathwaybased drug discovery. Here we have applied a matrixbased approach to develop a dynamic model of SL metabolism by integrating legacy information on the lipid pathways with novel experimental data. The metabolic pathway was reconstructed using information from the KEGG database and the existing literature. Based upon the network map reconstructed, we have developed an ordinary differential equationsbased mathematical model. Parameterestimation used a twostep approach. In the first step, a matrixbased approach provided an initial guess. The parametervalues were further refined in the second step. The resulting model fitted the experimental data well for all species and demonstrated that the integrated metabolic and signaling network and the experimental data are consistent with each other. The robustness of the model parameters was also validated through sensitivity analysis. Though we have used this twostep approach previously and applied it to eicosanoid lipid pathway, the major distinction lies in its application to the SL metabolic pathway and the integration of transcriptomic data with the metabolomic data along with legacy knowledge to develop the kinetic model. Previous computational models of sphingolipid metabolism were for nonmammalian systems in which only a few metabolites were measured as compared to the total number of metabolites in the reaction network. In comparison, our model is based on a large amount of experimental timecourse data where the concentrations of most metabolites and mRNA levels of genes in the network are measured. This provides a more contextspecific model for RAW cells in particular and for mammalian cell systems in general.
Appendix A
The flux expressions for the reactions shown in Figure 1 are as follows:
v_{1} = k_{f1}[DHSph][CoA16][CerS6]
v_{2} = k_{f2}[DHSph][CoA16]
v_{3} = k_{f3}[C_{16} DHCer]
v_{4} = k_{f4}[DHSph][Sphk1]
v_{5} = k_{f5}[DHSph][Sphk2]
v_{6} = k_{f6}[DHSph1P]
v_{7} = k_{f7}[C_{16} DHCer][Ugcg]
v_{8} = k_{f8}[C_{16} DHGlcCer]
v_{9} = k_{f9}[C_{16} DHCer][Sms1][C_{16} GPCho]  k_{b9}[C_{16} DHSM][Sms1][C_{16} DG]
v_{10} = k_{f10}[C_{16} DHCer][Sms2][C_{16} GPCho]  k_{b10}[C_{16} DHSM][Sms2][C_{16} DG]
v_{11} = k_{f11}[C_{16} DHSM][Smpd1]
v_{12} = k_{f12}[C_{16} DHSM]
v_{13} = k_{f13}[C_{16} DHCer][Cerk]
v_{14} = k_{f14}[C_{16} DHCerP]
v_{15} = k_{f15}[C_{16} DHCer][Degs1]
v_{16} = k_{f16}[C_{16} DHCer]
v_{17} = k_{f17}[C_{16} Cer][Cerk]
v_{18} = k_{f18}[C_{16} CerP]
v_{19} = k_{f19}[C_{16} Cer][Sms1][C_{16} GPCho]  k_{b19}[C_{16} SM][Sms1][C_{16} DG]
v_{20} = k_{f20}[C_{16} Cer][Sms2][C_{16} GPCho]  k_{b20}[C_{16} SM][Sms2][C_{16} DG]
v_{21} = k_{f21}[C_{16} SM][Smpd1]
v_{22} = k_{f22}[C_{16} SM]
v_{23} = k_{f23}[C_{16} Cer]
v_{24} = k_{f24}[C_{16} Cer][Ugcg]
v_{25} = k_{f25}[C_{16} GlcCer]
The differential equations describing the rate of change of metabolite concentrations are:
d[C_{16} DHCer]/dt = v_{1} + v_{2}  v_{3}  v_{7}  v_{9}  v_{10} + v_{11}  v_{13}  v_{15}  v_{16}
d[DHSph1P]/dt = v_{4} + v_{5}  v_{6}
d[C_{16} DHGlcCer]/dt = v_{7}  v_{8}
d[C_{16} DHSM]/dt = v_{9} + v_{10}  v_{11}  v_{12}
d[C_{16} DHCerP]/dt = v_{13}  v_{14}
d[C_{16} Cer]/dt = v_{15} + v_{16}  v_{17}  v_{19}  v_{20} + v_{21}  v_{23}  v_{24}
d[C_{16} CerP]/dt = v_{17}  v_{18}
d[C_{16} SM]/dt = v_{19} + v_{20}  v_{21}  v_{22}
d[C_{16} GlcCer]/dt = v_{24}  v_{25}
Abbreviations used
 Cer:

Ceramide
 CerP:

Ceramide1phosphate
 Cerk:

ceramide kinase
 Degs1:

degenerative spermatocyte homolog 1 (Drosophila)
 Degs2:

degenerative spermatocyte homolog 2 (Drosophila), lipid desaturase
 CerS5:

ceramide synthase 5
 CerS6:

ceramide synthase 6
 Smpd1:

sphingomyelin phosphodiesterase 1, acid lysosomal
 Sphk1:

sphingosine kinase 1
 Sphk2:

sphingosine kinase 2
 Sms1:

sphingomyelin synthase 1
 Sms2:

sphingomyelin synthase 2
 Ugcg:

UDPglucose ceramide glucosyltransferase
 C16 Cer:

N(hexadecanoyl) sphing4enine (C16 Ceramide)
 C16 CerP:

N(hexadecanoyl) sphing4enine1phosphate (C16 Ceramide1phosphate)
 C16 GlcCer:

N(hexadecanoyl)1β sphing4enine (C16 Glucosylceramide)
 C16 SM:

N(hexadecanoyl) sphing4enine 1phosphocholine (C16 Sphingomyelin)
 C16 DHCer:

N(hexadecanoyl)sphinganine (C16 Dihydroceramide)
 C16 DHCerP:

N(hexadecanoyl)sphinganine1phosphate
 C16 DHGlcCer:

N(hexadecanoyl)1βglucosylsphinganine
 C16 DHSM:

N(hexadecanoyl)sphinganine1phosphocholine
 DHSph:

Sphinganine
 DHSph1P:

Sphinganine1phosphate
 DHGalCer:

Dihydro Galactosylceramide
 GalCer:

Galactosylceramide
Declarations
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the assistance of Eoin Fahy for preparing the network map of sphingolipid metabolism, and Elaine Wang, Kristin Jones, Samuel Kelly, Rebecca Shaner and Jeremy Allegood for the analysis of the sphingolipids by mass spectrometry. This research was supported by NIH Collaborative Grant U54 GM6933804 LIPID MAPS (S.S.) and NIDDK Grant P01DK074868 (S.S., and C.K.G.).
Authors’ Affiliations
References
 Fahy E, Subramaniam S, Brown HA, Glass CK, Merrill AH, Murphy RC, Raetz CRH, Russell DW, Seyama Y, Shaw W, et al., et al.: A comprehensive classification system for lipids. Journal of lipid research 2005,46(5):839862. 10.1194/jlr.E400004JLR200View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Merrill AH, Wang MD, Park M, Sullards MC: (Glyco)sphingolipidology: an amazing challenge and opportunity for systems biology. Trends Biochem Sci 2007,32(10):457468. 10.1016/j.tibs.2007.09.004View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Zheng W, Kollmeyer J, Symolon H, Momin A, Munter E, Wang E, Kelly S, Allegood JC, Liu Y, Peng Q, et al., et al.: Ceramides and other bioactive sphingolipid backbones in health and disease: lipidomic analysis, metabolism and roles in membrane structure, dynamics, signaling and autophagy. Biochim Biophys Acta 2006,1758(12):18641884. 10.1016/j.bbamem.2006.08.009View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Lopez PH, Schnaar RL: Gangliosides in cell recognition and membrane protein regulation. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2009,19(5):549557. 10.1016/j.sbi.2009.06.001PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Zeidan YH, Hannun YA: Translational aspects of sphingolipid metabolism. Trends Mol Med 2007,13(8):327336. 10.1016/j.molmed.2007.06.002View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Wennekes T, van den Berg RJ, Boot RG, van der Marel GA, Overkleeft HS, Aerts JM: Glycosphingolipidsnature, function, and pharmacological modulation. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2009,48(47):88488869. 10.1002/anie.200902620View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Murphy RC, Fiedler J, Hevko J: Analysis of nonvolatile lipids by mass spectrometry. Chem Rev 2001,101(2):479526. 10.1021/cr9900883View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 KEGG BRITE database[http://www.genome.jp/kegg/brite.html]
 SphinGOMAP pathways[http://sphingolab.biology.gatech.edu]
 Gehlenborg N, O'Donoghue SI, Baliga NS, Goesmann A, Hibbs MA, Kitano H, Kohlbacher O, Neuweger H, Schneider R, Tenenbaum D, et al., et al.: Visualization of omics data for systems biology. Nat Methods 2010,7(3 Suppl):S5668. 10.1038/nmeth.1436View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Bartke N, Hannun YA: Bioactive sphingolipids: metabolism and function. Journal of lipid research 2009,50(Suppl):S9196. 10.1194/jlr.R800080JLR200PubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
 Kitatani K, IdkowiakBaldys J, Hannun YA: The sphingolipid salvage pathway in ceramide metabolism and signaling. Cell Signal 2008,20(6):10101018. 10.1016/j.cellsig.2007.12.006PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Fyrst H, Saba JD: Sphingosine1phosphate lyase in development and disease: sphingolipid metabolism takes flight. Biochim Biophys Acta 2008,1781(9):448458.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Maceyka M, Milstien S, Spiegel S: Sphingosine1phosphate: the Swiss army knife of sphingolipid signaling. Journal of lipid research 2009,50(Suppl):S272276. 10.1194/jlr.R800065JLR200PubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
 Henning PA, Merrill AH, Wang MD: Dynamic pathway modeling of sphingolipid metabolism. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2004, 4: 29132916.PubMedGoogle Scholar
 AlvarezVasquez F, Sims KJ, Cowart LA, Okamoto Y, Voit EO, Hannun YA: Simulation and validation of modelled sphingolipid metabolism in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nature 2005,433(7024):425430. 10.1038/nature03232View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Henning P, Moffitt R, Allegood J, Wang E, Merrill A, Wang M: Computationally predicting rate constants in pathway models. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2005, 5: 50935096.PubMedGoogle Scholar
 Garcia J, Shea J, AlvarezVasquez F, Qureshi A, Luberto C, Voit EO, Del Poeta M: Mathematical modeling of pathogenicity of Cryptococcus neoformans. Mol Syst Biol 2008, 4: 183. 10.1038/msb.2008.17PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG)[http://www.genome.ad.jp/kegg/]
 Junker BH, Klukas C, Schreiber F: VANTED: A system for advanced data analysis and visualization in the context of biological networks. BMC Bioinformatics 2006., 7:Google Scholar
 Gupta S, Maurya MR, Stephens DL, Dennis EA, Subramaniam S: An Integrated Model of Eicosanoid Metabolism and Signaling Based on Lipidomics Flux Analysis. Biophysical Journal 2009,96(11):45424551. 10.1016/j.bpj.2009.03.011PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Merrill AH Jr: Characterization of serine palmitoyltransferase activity in Chinese hamster ovary cells. Biochim Biophys Acta 1983,754(3):284291.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Sullards MC, Allegood JC, Kelly S, Wang E, Haynes CA, Park H, Chen Y, Merrill AH Jr: Structurespecific, quantitative methods for analysis of sphingolipids by liquid chromatographytandem mass spectrometry: "insideout" sphingolipidomics. Methods Enzymol 2007, 432: 83115. full_text full_text full_textView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Maurya MR, Subramaniam S: A kinetic model for calcium dynamics in RAW 264.7 cells: 1. Mechanisms, parameters, and subpopulational variability. Biophys J 2007,93(3):709728. 10.1529/biophysj.106.097469PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Yoshikawa K, Kita Y, Kishimoto K, Shimizu T: Profiling of eicosanoid production in the rat hippocampus during kainic acidinduced seizure: dual phase regulation and differential involvement of COX1 and COX2. The Journal of biological chemistry 2006,281(21):1466314669. 10.1074/jbc.M511089200View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 The Mathworks, Inc.© 1994  2010[http://www.mathworks.com/]
 Dennis EA, Deems RA, Harkewicz R, Quehenberger O, Brown HA, Milne SB, Myers DS, Glass CK, Hardiman GT, Reichart D, et al., et al.: A Mouse Macrophage Lipidome. J Biol Chem 2010,285(51):3997639985. 10.1074/jbc.M110.182915PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Messmer TO, Wang E, Stevens VL, Merrill AH Jr: Sphingolipid biosynthesis by rat liver cells: effects of serine, fatty acids and lipoproteins. J Nutr 1989,119(4):534538.PubMedGoogle Scholar
 Merrill AH, Wang E, Mullins RE: Kinetics of longchain (sphingoid) base biosynthesis in intact LM cells: effects of varying the extracellular concentrations of serine and fatty acid precursors of this pathway. Biochemistry 1988,27(1):340345. 10.1021/bi00401a051View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 GomezMunoz A: Ceramide 1phosphate/ceramide, a switch between life and death. Biochim Biophys Acta 2006,1758(12):20492056. 10.1016/j.bbamem.2006.05.011View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 Niwa S, Graf C, Bornancin F: Ceramide kinase deficiency impairs microendothelial cell angiogenesis in vitro. Microvasc Res 2009,77(3):389393. 10.1016/j.mvr.2009.01.006View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
 HinkovskaGalcheva V, VanWay SM, Shanley TP, Kunkel RG: The role of sphingosine1phosphate and ceramide1phosphate in calcium homeostasis. Curr Opin Investig Drugs 2008,9(11):11921205.PubMedGoogle Scholar
 Pettus BJ, Kitatani K, Chalfant CE, Taha TA, Kawamori T, Bielawski J, Obeid LM, Hannun YA: The coordination of prostaglandin E2 production by sphingosine1phosphate and ceramide1phosphate. Mol Pharmacol 2005,68(2):330335.PubMedGoogle Scholar
 Saxena S, Banerjee M, Shirumalla RK, Ray A: Ceramide kinase: a potential antiinflammatory target? Curr Opin Investig Drugs 2008,9(5):455462.PubMedGoogle Scholar
 Lamour NF, Chalfant CE: Ceramide kinase and the ceramide1phosphate/cPLA2alpha interaction as a therapeutic target. Curr Drug Targets 2008,9(8):674682. 10.2174/138945008785132349View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Copyright
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.