Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, Rega Institute for Medical Research, Laboratory of Molecular Bacteriology, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Department of Chemical Engineering, Chemical and Biochemical Reactor Engineering and Safety (CREaS), KU Leuven, 3001, Leuven, Belgium.
BMC Bioinformatics. 2024 Jan 23;25(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s12859-024-05651-7.
Given a genome-scale metabolic model (GEM) of a microorganism and criteria for optimization, flux balance analysis (FBA) predicts the optimal growth rate and its corresponding flux distribution for a specific medium. FBA has been extended to microbial consortia and thus can be used to predict interactions by comparing in-silico growth rates for co- and monocultures. Although FBA-based methods for microbial interaction prediction are becoming popular, a systematic evaluation of their accuracy has not yet been performed.
Here, we evaluate the accuracy of FBA-based predictions of human and mouse gut bacterial interactions using growth data from the literature. For this, we collected 26 GEMs from the semi-curated AGORA database as well as four previously published curated GEMs. We tested the accuracy of three tools (COMETS, Microbiome Modeling Toolbox and MICOM) by comparing growth rates predicted in mono- and co-culture to growth rates extracted from the literature and also investigated the impact of different tool settings and media. We found that except for curated GEMs, predicted growth rates and their ratios (i.e. interaction strengths) do not correlate with growth rates and interaction strengths obtained from in vitro data.
Prediction of growth rates with FBA using semi-curated GEMs is currently not sufficiently accurate to predict interaction strengths reliably.
给定微生物的基因组规模代谢模型 (GEM) 和优化标准,通量平衡分析 (FBA) 可预测特定培养基的最佳生长速率及其相应的通量分布。FBA 已扩展到微生物群落,因此可用于通过比较共培养物和单培养物的计算生长速率来预测相互作用。尽管基于 FBA 的微生物相互作用预测方法越来越受欢迎,但尚未对其准确性进行系统评估。
在这里,我们使用文献中的生长数据评估基于 FBA 的人类和小鼠肠道细菌相互作用预测的准确性。为此,我们从半编纂的 AGORA 数据库中收集了 26 个 GEM,以及四个之前发表的编纂 GEM。我们通过将单培养和共培养预测的生长速率与从文献中提取的生长速率进行比较,测试了 COMETS、微生物组建模工具箱和 MICOM 这三种工具的准确性,还研究了不同工具设置和培养基的影响。我们发现,除了编纂的 GEM 外,使用半编纂的 GEM 通过 FBA 预测的生长速率及其比值(即相互作用强度)与从体外数据获得的生长速率和相互作用强度不相关。
目前,使用半编纂的 GEM 通过 FBA 预测生长速率还不够准确,无法可靠地预测相互作用强度。