| Literature DB >> 18364711 |
Arvind K Chavali1, Jeffrey D Whittemore, James A Eddy, Kyle T Williams, Jason A Papin.
Abstract
Systems analyses have facilitated the characterization of metabolic networks of several organisms. We have reconstructed the metabolic network of Leishmania major, a poorly characterized organism that causes cutaneous leishmaniasis in mammalian hosts. This network reconstruction accounts for 560 genes, 1112 reactions, 1101 metabolites and 8 unique subcellular localizations. Using a systems-based approach, we hypothesized a comprehensive set of lethal single and double gene deletions, some of which were validated using published data with approximately 70% accuracy. Additionally, we generated hypothetical annotations to dozens of previously uncharacterized genes in the L. major genome and proposed a minimal medium for growth. We further demonstrated the utility of a network reconstruction with two proof-of-concept examples that yielded insight into robustness of the network in the presence of enzymatic inhibitors and delineation of promastigote/amastigote stage-specific metabolism. This reconstruction and the associated network analyses of L. major is the first of its kind for a protozoan. It can serve as a tool for clarifying discrepancies between data sources, generating hypotheses that can be experimentally validated and identifying ideal therapeutic targets.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18364711 PMCID: PMC2290936 DOI: 10.1038/msb.2008.15
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Syst Biol ISSN: 1744-4292 Impact factor: 11.429
Figure 1Network characteristics of iAC560. Fundamental characteristics of the iAC560 metabolic network are summarized. In (A) the total number of genes, reactions, metabolites, subsystems (via the KEGG classification scheme), compartments and literature references used in the model are listed. In (B), the most highly connected metabolites in every compartment of the model are presented. The absolute value indicates the total number of times a particular metabolite is participating in reactions within the model. The relative connectivity is equal to the absolute connectivity divided by the sum of the absolute connections of all metabolites in the network. (C–F) The iAC560 reactions grouped by gene–non-gene associations, enzyme commission (EC) classifications, compartments or subcellular localizations, and metabolic processes, respectively. *ADP and ATP have equal connectivity in the flagellum.
Figure 2Single and double gene deletion predictions. The results of in silico gene deletion predictions are summarized. (A) Single gene deletion predictions are classified into four categories with respect to wild type: lethal (0%), growth reducing (>0% and <90%), growth reducing (>90% and <100%) and no effect (100%). For each case, the percentage of growth is indicated in the parentheses. (B) The lethal single gene deletions grouped according to metabolic processes. (C) The total number of lethal single and double gene deletions. Lethal double gene deletions can be classified as trivial lethal or non-trivial lethal. Trivial lethal implies that at least one of the genes involved is lethal in a single gene deletion. In non-trivial lethal double deletions, both genes involved are not lethal individually as single gene deletions but are lethal in combination.
Validation of reaction knockout predictions
Table of annotation refinements
| Gene | Annotation compiled from KEGG/GeneDB | Proposed iAC560 annotation | Evidence | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Putative identification | Localization | EC classification | Identification | Localization | EC classification | ||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with genes from | ||||
| Fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase, cytosolic, putative | Cytosol | EC: 3.1.3.11 | Fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase | EC: 3.1.3.11 | See | ||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | Unknown | EC: 3.6.1.- | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with two annotated genes each from | |||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Endoplasmic reticulum, membrane | Unknown | Endoplasmic reticulum | BLAST search snows amino-acid sequence similarity with genes from | |||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with two annotated genes from | ||||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with genes from | ||||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with one | ||||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with genes from | ||||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved 2,4-dihydroxyhept-2-ene-1,7-dioic acid aldolase | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with genes from | ||||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with genes from | ||||
| Dihydrolipoamide dehydrogenase, putative | Cytoplasm | EC: 1.8.1.4 | Dihydrolipoamide dehydrogenase | EC: 1.8.1.4 | See | ||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with gene from | ||||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with gene from | ||||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | EC: 3.6.1.- | EC: 3.6.1.- | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with two annotated genes each from | |||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with genes from | ||||
| Dihydrolipoamide dehydrogenase, putative | Cytoplasm | EC: 1.8.1.4 | Dihydrolipoamide dehydrogenase | EC: 1.8.1.4 | See | ||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | Unknown | See | ||||
| Fatty acid desaturase, putative | Membrane | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino acid sequence similarity with one functionally annotated gene each from | ||||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with genes from | ||||
| Galactokinase-like protein | Cytoplasm | EC: 2.7.1.6 | Galactokinase | EC: 2.7.1.6 | PTS detected | ||
| Phosphomannomutase, putative | Cytoplasm | EC: 3.1.3.11 | Phosphomannomutase | Cytosol | EC number obtained from ExPASy ENZYME database | ||
| Hypothetical protein, unknown function | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with genes from | ||||
| Succinyl-CoA ligase (GDP forming) beta-chain, putative | Mitochondria | EC: 6.2.1.5 | Succinyl-CoA ligase (GDP forming) | Mitochondria | EC: 6.2.1.5 is for ADP-forming succinyl-CoA ligase. EC number obtained from ExPASy ENZYME database | ||
| Translation initiation factor 2 subunit, putative | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with genes from | ||||
| Hypothetical protein, conserved | Unknown | Unknown | BLAST search shows amino-acid sequence similarity with genes from | ||||
Current gene annotations, including putative identification, localization, and EC classification were compiled from KEGG and GeneDB. The new proposed iAC560 annotations for gene identification, localization or EC classification are shown in bold and italics. The corresponding evidence for the refined annotation is provided to the right.
Figure 3Construction of a gene–protein reaction (GPR) relationship. A flowchart highlighting the process of constructing a GPR based on the amount of gene or EC information available for a particular reaction in public databases or literature is illustrated.
Figure 4Minimal medium prediction and effects of non-essential substrates in defined medium on growth. (A) Minimal medium and non-essential substrates in defined medium are delineated. The defined medium was obtained from Merlen et al (1999); Schuster and Sullivan (2002). (B) The effects of in silico minimal medium on production of biomass constituents are summarized. Gray- and red-colored boxes are indicative of particular biomass constituents that are and are not produced, respectively, when the corresponding substrate in the minimal medium is prevented from entering the metabolic system. The dotted ‘X' indicates biomass constituents that cannot be produced when oxygen and another substrate in minimal medium are restricted from entering the metabolic system. (C) The effects of non-essential substrates in defined medium on growth rate are shown. The vertical bars represent normalized growth rate when each substrate is removed from the environment. †See Supplementary Information VII for all metabolite abbreviations. ‡Non-essential substrates in defined medium belonging to the ‘other' category include a-D-glucose, b-D-glucose, ascb, asn-L, asp-L, btn, ca2, chsterol, co2, fol, gln-L, glu-L, gly, gthrd, gua, h, h2o, inost, nac, ncam, nh3, nh4, pnto-R, pydx, pydxn, rib-D, so4, thym, tyr-L and xan.
Figure 5F0F1-ATP synthase robustness analysis. The normalized growth rate corresponding to F0F1-ATP synthase flux is plotted. The white circles indicate single optimization simulations that are run at different ATP synthase flux values to measure flux through biomass (growth rate).
Figure 6Reactions differentially expressed in amastigote or promastigote stages. The metabolic reactions that distinguish the morphological stages of L. major are highlighted. These include reactions catalyzed by hexokinase, ATP synthase, alcohol dehydrogenase and enolase. The red ‘X' indicates that the flux through each reaction is reduced to 10% of its wild-type stage-independent flux value to characterize morphological stage-specific metabolism.
Figure 7Growth effects in amastigote and promastigote stages. The growth rate is assessed after accounting for the flux through reactions catalyzed by differentially expressed enzymes in amastigote and promastigote stages. Hexokinase is preferentially expressed in amastigotes, while ATP synthase, alcohol dehydrogenase and enolase are preferentially expressed in promastigotes (Leifso et al, 2007). As a proof-of-concept, reducing the flux through hexokinase represents a promastigote metabolic network, and reducing the flux through ATP synthase, alcohol dehydrogenase and enolase in combination implies an amastigote metabolic network. Vertical bars indicate normalized growth rate. **The flux through each reaction is reduced to 10% of its wild-type stage-independent flux value.