| Literature DB >> 34330235 |
Hao Luo1, Peishun Li1, Hao Wang1,2,3, Stefan Roos4, Boyang Ji1, Jens Nielsen5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Limosilactobacillus reuteri (earlier known as Lactobacillus reuteri) is a well-studied lactic acid bacterium, with some specific strains used as probiotics, that exists in different hosts such as human, pig, goat, mouse and rat, with multiple body sites such as the gastrointestinal tract, breast milk and mouth. Numerous studies have confirmed the beneficial effects of orally administered specific L. reuteri strains, such as preventing bone loss and promoting regulatory immune system development. L. reuteri ATCC PTA 6475 is a widely used strain that has been applied in the market as a probiotic due to its positive effects on the human host. Its health benefits may be due, in part, to the production of beneficial metabolites. Considering the strain-specific effects and genetic diversity of L. reuteri strains, we were interested to study the metabolic versatility of these strains.Entities:
Keywords: Core metabolism; Limosilactobacillus reuteri, Lactobacillus; Pan metabolism; Probiotic, Genome-scale metabolic model, Metabolic versatility
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34330235 PMCID: PMC8325179 DOI: 10.1186/s12896-021-00702-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Biotechnol ISSN: 1472-6750 Impact factor: 2.563
Fig. 1The L. reuteri ATCC PTA 6475 genome-scale metabolic reconstruction. (a) Template-based modeling pipeline. The iNF517 was employed as the primary template model and extracted ortholog genes and reactions based on bidirectional best hits (BBH) to generate the draft models. After comparing with LbReuteri, iML1515 and iBT721, the exchange and transport reactions were added from the templates according to the transporter annotations and corresponding medium composition. The gap-filling was performed with COBRApy on the primary template model and used the MetaCyc database as a backup to improve the model performance. The GEM was also manually curated during the simulation and validation. (b) The COG functional distribution of genes in GEM. J, translation, ribosomal structure and biogenesis; K, transcription; L, replication, recombination and repair; D, cell cycle control, cell division, chromosome partitioning; V, defense mechanisms; T, signal transduction mechanisms; M, cell wall/membrane/envelope biogenesis; N, cell motility; O, posttranslational modification, protein turnover, chaperones; C, energy production and conversion; G, carbohydrate transport and metabolism; E, amino acid transport and metabolism; F, nucleotide transport and metabolism; H, coenzyme transport and metabolism; I, lipid transport and metabolism; P, inorganic ion transport and metabolism; Q, secondary metabolites biosynthesis, transport and catabolism; R, general function prediction only; S, function unknown; *, no COG categories. (c) The venn diagram of common and unique reactions in the four lactic acid bacterium models. iHL622 is the GEM of L. reuteri ATCC PTA 6475 in this study, iNF517, LbReuteri and iBT721 are the GEMs of L. lactis MG1363, L. reuteri JCM 1112 and L. plantarum WCFS1 separately
Model characteristics of iHL622 and comparison with template GEMs
| Model | LbReuteri | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Organism | JCM 1112 | MG1655 | |||
| Genes | 2019 | 2339 | 1943 | 3063 | 4243 |
| Included | 622 (31%) | 516 (22%) | 530 (27%) | 724 (24%) | 1516 (36%) |
| Reactions | 869 | 754 | 714 | 778 | 2712 |
| Common with iHL622 | 869 | 483 | 531 | 392 | 509 |
| With GPRa | 709 (82%) | 541 (72%) | 606 (85%) | 528 (68%) | 2266 (86%) |
| Internal | 644 | 530 | 507 | 538 | 1548 |
| Transport | 122 | 119 | 123 | 127 | 833 |
| Exchange | 103 | 105 | 84 | 113 | 331 |
| Metabolites | 713 | 650 | 660 | 662 | 1877 |
| Unique | 605 | 545 | 561 | 549 | 1071 |
| Biomass consistency | 1.00 | 0.83 | -b | -b | 1.00 |
| MEMOTE Score | 60% | 57% | 38% | 68% |
a Gene-Protein-Reaction Associations
b Not applicable
Fig. 2The predictions based on the iHL622 GEM. (a) Experimental and predicted growth rates. The experimental data for each dataset are shown in orange, and the prediction showing in green. (b) Growth capability under amino acid omitted medium. Experimental data are showed in the first row, while the predictions of single amino acid omission are shown in the rest rows. The growth showing in green and no growth showing in grey. (c) The predictions of representative metabolites. Eight products (lactate, acetate, ethanol, histamine, folate, cobalamin, 1-propanol and 1,3-propanediol) were predicted. Experimental data are showed in the first row, while the modeling results are shown in the rest rows. The produce showing in green and no productions showing in grey
Fig. 3Overview of the metabolic pathways in L. reuteri. Green arrows indicate the phosphoketolase pathway (PKP); blue arrows indicate Emden-Meyerhof Parnas pathway (EMP); orange arrows indicate the extensions of EMP; and the dotted arrows indicate multiple enzymatic reactions. Green backgrounds indicate the extracellular metabolites and blue backgrounds indicate the L. reuteri products. The pie diagram under the metabolites shows the percentage of models in each group that could produce those corresponding metabolites. Green-grey pie diagram showing the group of herbivore-derived strains, orange-grey pie diagram showing the omnivore-derived group and blue-grey pie showing the sourdough-derived group
Fig. 4Characteristics of core- and pan-GEMs of 35 L. reuteri strains from different hosts. (a) Genome size shown in blue on the right, GEMs characteristics shown on the left. Green asterisks indicate the number of reactions, orange asterisks indicate the number of metabolites, and light blue asterisks indicate the number of genes in each GEM. These GEMs are grouped by host: herbivore, omnivore, and sourdough. The strains list in the y-axis are sorted in descending order by genome size in each group. (b,c,d) Upset plot of genes, reactions and metabolites between the pan-models of three groups. The total height of the bar indicates the union size of the corresponding group in the horizontal coordinate. In the final plotted bar, only appearing in one group is considered specific, appearing in all groups is considered common and appearing in two (between one and all) groups is considered dispensable. The common, dispensable and specific size from all combinations are shown