In silico approaches to study mass and energy flows in microbial consortia: a syntrophic case study
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：Reed Taffs (1) (2)
John E Aston (1) (2)
Kristen Brileya (1) (2)
Zackary Jay (1)
Christian G Klatt (1)
Shawn McGlynn (1)
Natasha Mallette (1) (2)
Scott Montross (1)
Robin Gerlach (1) (2)
William P Inskeep (1)
David M Ward (1)
Ross P Carlson (1) (2) - 刊名：BMC Systems Biology
- 出版年：2009
- 出版时间：December 2009
- 年：2009
- 卷：3
- 期：1
- 全文大小：1334KB
- 参考文献：1. Falkowski PG, Fenchel T, Delong EF:
2. Kleerebezem R, van Loosdrecht MCM:
3. Ward DM, Ferris MJ, Nold SC, Bateson MM:
4. Ward DM, Cohan FM, Bhaya D, Heidelberg JF, Kuhl M, Grossman A:
5. Steunou AS, Jensen SI, Brecht E, Becraft ED, Bateson MM, Kilian O, Bhaya D, Ward DM, Peters JW, Grossman AR, / et al.:
6. Dillon JG, Fishbain S, Miller SR, Bebout BM, Habicht KS, Webb SM, Stahl DA:
7. Brock TD:
8. Brock TD:
9. Bateson MM, Ward DM:
10. Nold SC, Ward DM:
11. Steunou AS, Bhaya D, Bateson MM, Melendrez MC, Ward DM, Brecht E, Peters JW, K眉hl M, Grossman AR:
12. Meer MTJ, Schouten S, Bateson MM, N眉bel U, Wieland A, K眉hl M, de Leeuw JW, Damste JSS, Ward DM:
13. Garrett R, Grisham CM:
14. Horton HR:
15. Anderson KL, Tayne TA, Ward DM:
16. Konopka A:
17. Sandbeck KA, Ward DM:
18. Fr眉nd C, Cohen Y:
19. Begon M, Townsend CR, Harper JL:
20. Schuster S, Dandekar T, Fell DA:
21. Schuster S, Fell DA, Dandekar T:
22. Schuster S, Hilgetag C:
23. Carlson RP:
24. Carlson RP:
25. Kauffman KJ, Prakash P, Edwards JS:
26. Stephanopoulos GN, Aristidou AA, Nielsen JH:
27. Stolyar S, Van Dien S, Hillesland KL, Pinel N, Lie TJ, Leigh JA, Stahl DA:
28. Carlson RP, Fell DA, Srienc F:
29. Fell DA, Small JR:
30. Borenstein E, Feldman MW:
31. Janga SC, Babu MM:
32. Ma HW, Zeng AP:
33. Ma HW, Zeng AP:
34. Ma HW, Zeng AP:
35. Klamt S, Stelling J:
36. Amann RI, Ludwig W, Schleifer KH:
37. Terzer M, Stelling J:
38. Schuster S, Pfeiffer T, Moldenhauer F, Koch I, Dandekar T:
39. Kreft J-U:
40. Pfeiffer T, Schuster S, Bonhoeffer S:
41. Carlson R, Srienc F:
42. Ragsdale SW:
43. Jeong H, Tombor B, Albert R, Oltvai ZN, Barabasi A-L:
44. Wagner A, Fell DA:
45. Steuer R:
46. Gagneur J, Klamt S:
47. Stelling J, Klamt S, Bettenbrock K, Schuster S, Gilles ED:
48. Varma A, Palsson B脴:
49. Edwards JS, Covert M, Palsson B:
50. Edwards JS, Palsson B脴:
51. Bell SL, Palsson B脴:
52. Schuetz R, Kuepfer L, Sauer U:
53. Schuster S, Pfeiffer T, Fell DA:
54. Withgott J, Brennan SR:
55. Ward DM, Bateson MM, Ferris MJ, K眉hl M, Wieland A, Koeppel A, Cohan FM:
56. Dykhuizen D, Hartl DL:
57. Ludwig M, Schulz-Friedrich R, Appel J:
58. Bhaya D, Grossman AR, Steunou AS, Khuri N, Cohan FM, Hamamura N, Melendrez MC, Bateson MM, Ward DM, Heidelberg JF:
59. Klatt CG, Bryant DA, Ward DM:
60. Barton L, Hamilton WA:
61. Henry EA, Devereux R, Maki JS, Gilmour CC, Woese CR, Mandelco L, Schauder R, Remsen CC, Mitchell R:
62. Liolios K, Tavernarakis N, Hugenholtz P, Kyrpides NC:
63. White D:
64. Green ML, Karp PD:
65. Revsbech NP, Ward DM:
66. Klamt S, Saez-Rodriguez J, Gilles ED:
67. Klamt S, Gagneur J, von Kamp A: - 作者单位：Reed Taffs (1) (2)
John E Aston (1) (2)
Kristen Brileya (1) (2)
Zackary Jay (1)
Christian G Klatt (1)
Shawn McGlynn (1)
Natasha Mallette (1) (2)
Scott Montross (1)
Robin Gerlach (1) (2)
William P Inskeep (1)
David M Ward (1)
Ross P Carlson (1) (2)
1. Thermal Biology Institute, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, 59717, USA
2. Center for Biofilm Engineering, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, 59717, USA
文摘
Background Three methods were developed for the application of stoichiometry-based network analysis approaches including elementary mode analysis to the study of mass and energy flows in microbial communities. Each has distinct advantages and disadvantages suitable for analyzing systems with different degrees of complexity and a priori knowledge. These approaches were tested and compared using data from the thermophilic, phototrophic mat communities from Octopus and Mushroom Springs in Yellowstone National Park (USA). The models were based on three distinct microbial guilds: oxygenic phototrophs, filamentous anoxygenic phototrophs, and sulfate-reducing bacteria. Two phases, day and night, were modeled to account for differences in the sources of mass and energy and the routes available for their exchange. Results The in silico models were used to explore fundamental questions in ecology including the prediction of and explanation for measured relative abundances of primary producers in the mat, theoretical tradeoffs between overall productivity and the generation of toxic by-products, and the relative robustness of various guild interactions. Conclusion The three modeling approaches represent a flexible toolbox for creating cellular metabolic networks to study microbial communities on scales ranging from cells to ecosystems. A comparison of the three methods highlights considerations for selecting the one most appropriate for a given microbial system. For instance, communities represented only by metagenomic data can be modeled using the pooled method which analyzes a community's total metabolic potential without attempting to partition enzymes to different organisms. Systems with extensive a priori information on microbial guilds can be represented using the compartmentalized technique, employing distinct control volumes to separate guild-appropriate enzymes and metabolites. If the complexity of a compartmentalized network creates an unacceptable computational burden, the nested analysis approach permits greater scalability at the cost of more user intervention through multiple rounds of pathway analysis.