| Literature DB >> 17408508 |
Tunahan Cakir1, Betül Kirdar, Z Ilsen Onsan, Kutlu O Ulgen, Jens Nielsen.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Control effective flux (CEF) of a reaction is the weighted sum of all fluxes through that reaction, derived from elementary flux modes (EFM) of a metabolic network. Change in CEFs under different environmental conditions has earlier been proven to be correlated with the corresponding changes in the transcriptome. Here we use this to investigate the degree of transcriptional regulation of fluxes in the metabolism of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We do this by quantifying correlations between changes in CEFs and changes in transcript levels for shifts in carbon source, i.e. between the fermentative carbon source glucose and nonfermentative carbon sources like ethanol, acetate, and lactate. The CEF analysis is based on a simple stoichiometric model that includes reactions of the central carbon metabolism and the amino acid metabolism.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2007 PMID: 17408508 PMCID: PMC1855933 DOI: 10.1186/1752-0509-1-18
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Syst Biol ISSN: 1752-0509
Figure 1Methodology employed to analyze metabolic flux regulation in response to a shift in carbon source. The change in control-effective fluxes calculated based on determined elementary flux modes (EFMs) is plotted against the change in mRNA levels of the corresponding genes encoding the enzymes catalyzing the reactions. Data points not obeying the correlation are identified by a genetic algorithm approach. Remaining points correspond to hierarchically regulated fluxes.
Transcriptome datasets used in this study.
| Article | Source change | Fermentation type |
| DeRisi et al., 1997 | Carbon: Glucose- Ethanol | Batch |
| Lapujade et al., 2004 | Carbon: Glucose-Ethanol | Chemostat |
| Williams et al., 2002 | Carbon: Glucose-Acetate | Batch |
| Lapujade et al., 2004 | Carbon: Glucose-Acetate | Chemostat |
| Prokisch et al., 2004 | Carbon: Glucose-Lactate | Batch |
| Piper et al., 2002 | Oxygen: Aerobic-Anaerobic | Chemostat |
Number of EFMs for each studied carbon source and with the biomass composition reported in [16].
| Substrate | EFMs – M81* | EFMs – M57 |
| Glucose | 136,925 (184,631) | 13,255 |
| Ethanol | 11,427 (15,099) | 1,225 |
| Acetate | 4,240 (5,452) | 536 |
| Lactate | 25,484 (34,319) | 2,533 |
The numbers in paranthesis shows EFM numbers when the biomass composition of [19] is employed for comparison. EFM numbers for a smaller model (M57) are also given for comparison. The larger model (M81) includes 81 reactions and contains part of the amino acid biosynthesis together with the central carbon metabolism. The smaller model only covers the central metabolism with 57 reactions. *In M81, the EFMs with simultaneous occurrence of GDH2 and GDH13 were not taken into account since this leads to transhdrogenase activity, which is known to be not available in S. cerevisiae.
Results of simulations for genes belonging to central carbon metabolism. Corresponding figures are given in figure 2 and 3.
| Actual EFM number used in simulations | Qualitative agreement* | Omissions for R2:0.60 | Slope | Correlation coefficient (R2) | Omitted Genes | Not Applicable Genes# | |
| Glucose/Ethanol, batch | 127,872/11,427 | 0.82 (36/44) | 3$ | 1.06 | 0.65 | ||
| Glucose/Ethanol, chemostat | 9,600/7,051 | 0.77 (33/43) | 6 | 0.81 | 0.60 | ||
| Glucose/Acetate, batch | 127,872/4,238 | 0.76 (31/41) | 3 | 1.11 | 0.63 | ||
| Glucose/Acetate, chemostat | 9,600/4,190 | 0.78 (32/41) | 6 | 1.18 | 0.61 | ||
| Glucose/Lactate, batch | 127,872/25,482 | 0.84 (38/45) | 4 | 0.89 | 0.60 | ||
| Aerobic/Anaerobic, chemostat | 9,600/8,363 | 0.80 (33/41) | 19 | 1.23 | 0.60 | ||
*Data points in first/third quadrants of the plots. The points with a fold change between 0.95–1.05 for either of model or experiment were considered to be in qualitative agreement.
$These genes were found to exhibit better agreement with CEF ratios in the analysis of [21].
#CEF ratio was either zero or infinity for these genes. Therefore, they could not be used in the correlation calculation.
§ Omission of any two of these there points additional to the other four reported points is enough to get a correlation above the cut-off value, resulting in the same slope.
Figure 2Comparison of the model-based and experimental data-based logarithmic ratios for carbon shifts. The filled circles are the omitted points to reach regression coefficient R2 0.60. (a) shift from glucose to ethanol for batch cultures under respiro-fermentative conditions (data from [20]). Filled squares belong to ratios for pfk12 and fbp1 from [21]. (b) shift from glucose to ethanol for chemostat cultures under respiratory conditions (data from [3]). (c) shift from glucose to acetate for batch cultures under respiro-fermentative conditions (data from [25]). (d) shift from glucose to acetate for chemostat cultures under respiratory conditions (data from [3]). (e) shift from glucose to lactate for batch cultures under respiro-fermentative conditions data from [30]. For experiments with replicate data (b and d), the horizontal lines on the circles show 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 3Comparison of the model-based and experimental data-based [36] logarithmic ratios for oxygen source perturbation from aerobic to anaerobic conditions in chemostat cultures. The filled circles are the omitted points to reach the selected threshold value of R2 = 0.60. The horizontal lines on the circles show 95% confidence intervals, calculated from standard deviation of the replicate measurements.