| Literature DB >> 35108266 |
Gabriela Canto-Encalada1, Diego Tec-Campos1,2, Juan D Tibocha-Bonilla2, Karsten Zengler2,3,4, Alejandro Zepeda1, Cristal Zuñiga2.
Abstract
The ammonia-oxidizing bacterium Nitrosomonas europaea has been widely recognized as an important player in the nitrogen cycle as well as one of the most abundant members in microbial communities for the treatment of industrial or sewage wastewater. Its natural metabolic versatility and extraordinary ability to degrade environmental pollutants (e.g., aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzene and toluene) enable it to thrive under various harsh environmental conditions. Constraint-based metabolic models constructed from genome sequences enable quantitative insight into the central and specialized metabolism within a target organism. These genome-scale models have been utilized to understand, optimize, and design new strategies for improved bioprocesses. Reduced modeling approaches have been used to elucidate Nitrosomonas europaea metabolism at a pathway level. However, genome-scale knowledge about the simultaneous oxidation of ammonia and pollutant metabolism of N. europaea remains limited. Here, we describe the reconstruction, manual curation, and validation of the genome-scale metabolic model for N. europaea, iGC535. This reconstruction is the most accurate metabolic model for a nitrifying organism to date, reaching an average prediction accuracy of over 90% under several growth conditions. The manually curated model can predict phenotypes under chemolithotrophic and chemolithoorganotrophic conditions while oxidating methane and wastewater pollutants. Calculated flux distributions under different trophic conditions show that several key pathways are affected by the type of carbon source available, including central carbon metabolism and energy production.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35108266 PMCID: PMC8853641 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009828
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Comput Biol ISSN: 1553-734X Impact factor: 4.475
Comparative table of the properties of the genome-scale model of Ne (iGC535) and other models.
| Model provenience | Reactions | Metabolites | Genes | Mass Imbalance metabolic reactions | Charge Imbalance metabolic reactions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ModelSEED | 1,069 | 1,185 | 497 | NA | 42 |
| CarveMe | 1,228 | 946 | 532 | 47 | NA |
| 1,102 | 1,014 | 578 | NA | 129 | |
| Stoichiometric metabolic network | 51 | 44 | 0 | NA | NA |
| 1,149 | 1,114 | 535 | 0 | 0 |
*Not available
Fig 1Features of iGC535.
(A) Comparison of shared reactions among iGC535 and template models (iHN637, iPC815, iML1515). (B) Comparison of shared genes among iGC535 and other Ne models. (C) Reactions distribution through the subsystems in the genome-scale model. (D) Electron transport chain simulated using fructose at high concentrations or HCO3- as the sole carbon source. Abbreviations: NADH16pp, NADH dehydrogenase; AMO, ammonia monooxygenase; HAO, hydroxylamine oxidoreductase; CYTEX, cytochrome exchange; Q8H2ASE, ubiquinol synthase; CYTbc1, CytCbc1 reductase using ubiquinol-8; C552oxi, cytochrome c552 oxidase; ATPS, ATP synthase; QH2, ubiquinol; Q, ubiquinone; HAM, hydroxylamine; C554red, cytochrome c554 reduced; C554ox, cytochrome c554 oxidized; c552mox, membrane cytochrome c552 oxidized; c552mred, membrane cytochrome c552 reduced; C552ox, cytochrome c552 oxidized; C552red, cytochrome c552 reduced; Fru, fructose.
Comparative table of simulations performed under different growth conditions of the Ne genome-scale model (iGC535) and other models.
| Condition | Constraint(s) | Evaluated Flux | Model | Simulation | Experimentally observed | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chemolithoorganotrophy | Fructose uptake rate (0.0773 mmol/gDW/h) | Growth rate (1/h) | ModelSEED | No growth | 0.011 | |
| CarveMe | No growth | |||||
| 0.0113 | ||||||
| 0.0106 | ||||||
| Pyruvate uptake rate (0.0773mmol/gDW/h) | Growth rate (1/h) | ModelSEED | No growth | NA** | ||
| CarveMe | No growth | |||||
| 0.0057 | ||||||
| 0.0053 | ||||||
| Chemolithotrophy | NO2- production rate (23.61 mmol/gDW/h) | Growth rate (1/h) | ModelSEED | No growth | 0.062 | |
| CarveMe | No growth | |||||
| 0.015 | ||||||
| 0.091 | ||||||
| Ammonium uptake rate (2.09mmol/gDW/h) | Oxygen uptake rate (mmol/gDW/h) | ModelSEED | 0 | 3.07±0.084 | ||
| CarveMe | 0 | |||||
| 0 | ||||||
| 2.71 | ||||||
| Ammonium uptake rate (1.266mmol/gDW/h) | Oxygen uptake rate (mmol/gDW/h) | ModelSEED | 0 | 2.03±0.05 | ||
| CarveMe | 0 | |||||
| 0 | ||||||
| 1.67 | ||||||
| Pollutants in culturing medium | Benzene uptake rate (1.258 mmol/gDW/h) | Oxygen uptake rate (mmol/gDW/h) | ModelSEED | 0 | 33.67 | |
| CarveMe | 0 | |||||
| 0 | ||||||
| 33.58 | ||||||
| Phenol uptake rate (1 mmol/gDW/h) | Oxygen uptake rate (mmol/gDW/h) | ModelSEED | 0 | NA** | ||
| CarveMe | 0 | |||||
| 0 | ||||||
| 0.0191 | ||||||
| Toluene uptake rate (0.5206mmol/gDW/h) | Oxygen uptake rate (mmol/gDW/h) | ModelSEED | 0 | 30.45±6.71 | ||
| CarveMe | 0 | |||||
| 0 | ||||||
| 33.44 | ||||||
| Chlorobenzene uptake rate (1 mmol/gDW/h) | Oxygen uptake rate (mmol/gDW/h) | ModelSEED | 0 | NA** | ||
| CarveMe | 0 | |||||
| 0 | ||||||
| 12.1 | ||||||
| Methane uptake rate (1.15 mmol/gDW/h) | Oxygen uptake rate (mmol/gDW/h) | ModelSEED | 0 | 3.14±0.086 | ||
| CarveMe | 0 | |||||
| 0 | ||||||
| 3.02 | ||||||
| Methane uptake rate (1.15 mmol/gDW/h) | Oxygen uptake rate (mmol/gDW/h) | ModelSEED | 0 | 2.38±0.065 | ||
| CarveMe | 0 | |||||
| 0 | ||||||
| 2.356 | ||||||
a Hommes et al., 2003[16]
b Sato et al., 1985 [31]
c Hyman and Wood, 1983 [32]
d Radniecki et al., 2008 [14]
e Average methane uptake rate reported by Bédard and Knowles, 1989; Hyman and Wood, 1983; Jones and Morita, 1983 [32–34]
*Not available
Note: None of the conditions were simulated by the stoichiometric network
Fig 2Map of the metabolic flux distributions predicted under chemolithoorganotrophic and chemolithotrophic conditions.
The map shows the changes in the flux distributions under four different growth conditions. Ammonium is present under all conditions but changing the carbon source (fructose, pyruvate, and HCO3-). (A) Chemolithoorganotrophy metabolism. The fructose uptake rate was constrained to 0.746 mmol/gDW/h, and the ammonium uptake rate was 0.5mmol/gDW/h. (B) Chemolithotrophy metabolism. HCO3- uptake rates were constrained to 4.35 mmol/gDW/h for high and 1.43 mmol/gDW/h for low. Abbreviations: HCO3E, carbonic anhydrase; PYK, pyruvate kinase; PPS, phosphoenolpyruvate synthasePGK, phosphoglycerate kinase; GAPD, glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase; PFK, phosphofructokinase; PGI, glucose 6-phosphate isomerase; G6PDH2r, glucose 6-phosphate dehydrogenase; PGL, 6-phosphogluconolactonase; GND, phosphogluconate dehydrogenase; RPI, ribose-5-phosphate isomerase; RPE, ribulose 5-phosphate 3-epimerase; TKT, transketolase; TPI, triose-phosphate isomerase; PRUK, phosphoribulokinase; RBPC, ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase-oxygenase; PDH, pyruvate dehydrogenase; CS, citrate synthase; MDH, malate dehydrogenase; SUCDi, succinate dehydrogenase; SUCOAS, succinyl-CoA synthetase; AKGDH, 2-oxoglutarate dehydrogenase; ICDHyr, isocitrate dehydrogenase; ORNTAC, ornithine transacetylase; G6P, D-Glucose 6-phosphate; F6P, D-Fructose 6-phosphate; FDP, D-Fructose 1,6-bisphosphate; G3P, Glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate; 13DPG, 3-Phospho-D-glyceroyl phosphate; 3PG, 3-Phospho-D-glycerate; 2PG, D-Glycerate 2-phosphate; PEP, Phosphoenolpyruvate; Pyr, Pyruvate; AcCoA, Acetyl-CoA; Fru, D-Fructose; Cit, citrate; Acon, Aconitate; iCit, Isocitrate; AKG, 2-Oxoglutarate; SucCoA, Succinyl-CoA; Suc, Succinate; Fum, Fumarate; Mal, L-Malate; OAA,Oxaloacetate; ArgSuc, L-Argininosuccinate; L-Citr, L-Citrulline; Orn, Ornithine; AcOrn, Acetylornithine; AcGlu, Acetyl-L-glutamate; AcG5P, Acetyl-L-glutamate 5-phosphate; AcG5SA, Acetyl-L-glutamate 5-semialdehyde; L-Glu, L-Glutamate; RuBP, D-Ribose 1,5-bisphosphate; Ru5P, D-Ribulose 5-phosphate; Xu5P, D-Xylulose 5-phosphate; DHAP, Dihydroxyacetone phosphate; E4P, Erythrose 4-phosphate dehydrogenase; S7P, Sedoheptulose 7-phosphate; S17BP, Sedoheptulose 1,7-bisphosphate; R5P, Ribose 5-phosphate; 6PGC, 6-Phospho-D-gluconate; 6PGL, 6-phospho-D-glucono-1,5-lactone.
Fig 3Flux distribution analysis under different growth conditions.
(A) Hierarchical clustering of flux distributions under different carbon sources and growth conditions. The HCO3- uptake rates were established at low and high levels, as we mentioned in Section 3.5.1. The pyruvate uptake flux (0.0773 mmol/gDW/h) used as a constraint in the simulations, resulted from the experimentally observed growth rate of 0.034 1/h [16] when Ne is grown using pyruvate as the organic carbon source. The methane and pollutant uptake rates were constrained to 1 mmol/gDW/h under the low HCO3- level condition. We used standararized Z-scores to normalize predicted fluxes. Z-scores represent negative and positive values in a blue to red color scale. The X-axis shows the metabolic reactions, and the Y-axis shows different growth conditions. * means low uptake rates; ** means high uptake rates. Group 1: 24 reactions; Group 2: 353 reactions; Group 3: 16 reactions; Group 4: 15 reactions. (B) Change in flux predictions of CBB cycle, glycolysis, rPPP reactions when fructose uptake is at low or high concentration. (C) Change in flux predictions of TCA cycle reactions when fructose uptake is at low or high concentration. (D) Change in flux predictions of energy metabolism reactions when fructose uptake is at low or high concentration. Abbreviations: FBA, Fructose-bisphosphate aldolase; PYK, pyruvate kinase; RPE, ribulose 5-phosphate 3-epimerase; RPI, ribose-5-phosphate isomerase; TALA, transaldolase; TKT, transketolase; TPI, triose-phosphate isomerase; PGI, glucose 6-phosphate isomerase; RBPC, ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase-oxygenase; PRUK, phosphoribulokinase; PFK, phosphofructokinase; ACONT, aconitate hydratase; CS, citrate synthase; FUM, fumarase; MDH, malate dehydrogenase; AKGDH, 2-oxoglutarate dehydrogenase; ICDHyr, isocitrate dehydrogenase; SUCDi, succinate dehydrogenase; SUCOAS, succinyl-CoA synthetase; THD2pp, NAD(P)+transhydrogenase; AMO, ammonia monooxygenase; HAO, hydroxylamine oxidoreductase; Q8H2ASE, ubiquinol synthase; CYTEX, cytochrome exchange; NADH16pp, NADH dehydrogenase.