Environmental versatility promotes modularity in genome-scale metabolic networks

BackgroundThe ubiquity of modules in biological networks may result from an evolutionary benefit of a modular organization. For instance, modularity may increase the rate of adaptive evolution, because modules can be easily combined into new arrangements that may benefit their carrier. Conversely, modularity may emerge as a by-product of some trait. We here ask whether this last scenario may play a role in genome-scale metabolic networks that need to sustain life in one or more chemical environments. For such networks, we define a network module as a maximal set of reactions that are fully coupled, i.e., whose fluxes can only vary in fixed proportions. This definition overcomes limitations of purely graph based analyses of metabolism by exploiting the functional links between reactions. We call a metabolic network viable in a given chemical environment if it can synthesize all of an organism's biomass compounds from nutrients in this environment. An organism's metabolism is highly versatile if it can sustain life in many different chemical environments. We here ask whether versatility affects the modularity of metabolic networks.ResultsUsing recently developed techniques to randomly sample large numbers of viable metabolic networks from a vast space of metabolic networks, we use flux balance analysis to study in silico metabolic networks that differ in their versatility. We find that highly versatile networks are also highly modular. They contain more modules and more reactions that are organized into modules. Most or all reactions in a module are associated with the same biochemical pathways. Modules that arise in highly versatile networks generally involve reactions that process nutrients or closely related chemicals. We also observe that the metabolism of E. coli is significantly more modular than even our most versatile networks.ConclusionsOur work shows that modularity in metabolic networks can be a by-product of functional constraints, e.g., the need to sustain life in multiple environments. This organizational principle is insensitive to the environments we consider and to the number of reactions in a metabolic network. Because we observe this principle not just in one or few biological networks, but in large random samples of networks, we propose that it may be a generic principle of metabolic network organization.

[1]  G. Church,et al.  Analysis of optimality in natural and perturbed metabolic networks , 2002 .

[2]  B. Palsson,et al.  Genome-scale in silico models of E. coli have multiple equivalent phenotypic states: assessment of correlated reaction subsets that comprise network states. , 2004, Genome research.

[3]  Carliss Y. Baldwin,et al.  Managing in an age of modularity. , 1997, Harvard business review.

[4]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Hierarchical Organization of Modularity in Metabolic Networks , 2002, Science.

[5]  C. Pál,et al.  Adaptive evolution of bacterial metabolic networks by horizontal gene transfer , 2005, Nature Genetics.

[6]  U. Alon Biological Networks: The Tinkerer as an Engineer , 2003, Science.

[7]  Reinhart Heinrich,et al.  Structural analysis of expanding metabolic networks. , 2004, Genome informatics. International Conference on Genome Informatics.

[8]  E. Ruppin,et al.  Regulatory on/off minimization of metabolic flux changes after genetic perturbations. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  M. Newman,et al.  Finding community structure in very large networks. , 2004, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[10]  Kenneth J. Kauffman,et al.  Advances in flux balance analysis. , 2003, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[11]  J. Hopfield,et al.  From molecular to modular cell biology , 1999, Nature.

[12]  N. Metropolis,et al.  Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines , 1953, Resonance.

[13]  Stefan Schuster,et al.  Detecting strictly detailed balanced subnetworks in open chemical reaction networks , 1991 .

[14]  F. Jacob,et al.  Evolution and tinkering. , 1977, Science.

[15]  C. Schilling,et al.  Flux coupling analysis of genome-scale metabolic network reconstructions. , 2004, Genome research.

[16]  Jason A. Papin,et al.  Extreme pathway lengths and reaction participation in genome-scale metabolic networks. , 2002, Genome research.

[17]  W. Vent,et al.  Riedl, Rupert, Die Ordnung des Lebendigen. Systembedingungen der Evolution. 372 S., 317 Abb., 7 Tab. Verlag Paul Parey. Hamburg und Berlin, 1975 Preis: geb. DM 98,‐ , 1978 .

[18]  C. Daub,et al.  BMC Systems Biology , 2007 .

[19]  Berend Snel,et al.  Quantifying modularity in the evolution of biomolecular systems. , 2004, Genome research.

[20]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Sciences of the Artificial , 1970 .

[21]  U. Sauer,et al.  Article number: 62 REVIEW Metabolic networks in motion: 13 C-based flux analysis , 2022 .

[22]  W. Vent,et al.  Rechenberg, Ingo, Evolutionsstrategie — Optimierung technischer Systeme nach Prinzipien der biologischen Evolution. 170 S. mit 36 Abb. Frommann‐Holzboog‐Verlag. Stuttgart 1973. Broschiert , 1975 .

[23]  Ulrik Brandes,et al.  On Modularity Clustering , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[24]  B. Palsson,et al.  Genome-scale models of microbial cells: evaluating the consequences of constraints , 2004, Nature Reviews Microbiology.

[25]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[26]  Andreas Wagner,et al.  Specialization Can Drive the Evolution of Modularity , 2010, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[27]  Anat Kreimer,et al.  The evolution of modularity in bacterial metabolic networks , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[28]  U. Alon,et al.  Spontaneous evolution of modularity and network motifs. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  P. Bork,et al.  Identification and analysis of evolutionarily cohesive functional modules in protein networks. , 2006, Genome research.

[30]  Edward P. K. Tsang,et al.  Foundations of constraint satisfaction , 1993, Computation in cognitive science.

[31]  M E J Newman,et al.  Modularity and community structure in networks. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[32]  K. Dill,et al.  The protein folding problem. , 1993, Annual review of biophysics.

[33]  B. Palsson,et al.  An expanded genome-scale model of Escherichia coli K-12 (iJR904 GSM/GPR) , 2003, Genome Biology.

[34]  Andreas Wagner,et al.  Genotype networks in metabolic reaction spaces , 2010, BMC Systems Biology.

[35]  Rupert Riedl,et al.  Die Ordnung des Lebendigen : Systembedingungen der Evolution , 1975 .

[36]  Andreas Wagner,et al.  Neutralism and selectionism: a network-based reconciliation , 2008, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[37]  R. Guimerà,et al.  Functional cartography of complex metabolic networks , 2005, Nature.

[38]  Eörs Szathmáry,et al.  Computational identification of obligatorily autocatalytic replicators embedded in metabolic networks , 2008, Genome Biology.

[39]  Sanjay Jain,et al.  Low degree metabolites explain essential reactions and enhance modularity in biological networks , 2005, BMC Bioinformatics.

[40]  Hiroyuki Ogata,et al.  KEGG: Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes , 1999, Nucleic Acids Res..

[41]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  The Option Value of Modularity in Design: An Example From Design Rules, Volume 1: The Power of Modularity , 2000 .

[42]  B. Palsson,et al.  The Escherichia coli MG1655 in silico metabolic genotype: its definition, characteristics, and capabilities. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[43]  B. Palsson,et al.  Parallel adaptive evolution cultures of Escherichia coli lead to convergent growth phenotypes with different gene expression states. , 2005, Genome research.

[44]  M E J Newman,et al.  Community structure in social and biological networks , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[45]  E. Bornberg-Bauer,et al.  How are model protein structures distributed in sequence space? , 1997, Biophysical journal.

[46]  Yaniv Ziv,et al.  Revealing modular organization in the yeast transcriptional network , 2002, Nature Genetics.

[47]  Andreas Wagner,et al.  Robustness Can Evolve Gradually in Complex Regulatory Gene Networks with Varying Topology , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[48]  Andreas Wagner,et al.  Evolutionary Plasticity and Innovations in Complex Metabolic Reaction Networks , 2009, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[49]  B. Palsson,et al.  Towards multidimensional genome annotation , 2006, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[50]  Alexander Rives,et al.  Modular organization of cellular networks , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[51]  U. Alon,et al.  Environmental variability and modularity of bacterial metabolic networks , 2007, BMC Evolutionary Biology.

[52]  P. Schuster,et al.  From sequences to shapes and back: a case study in RNA secondary structures , 1994, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[53]  S. Schuster,et al.  Metabolic network structure determines key aspects of functionality and regulation , 2002, Nature.

[54]  Oliver Ebenhöh,et al.  Comparing flux balance analysis to network expansion: producibility, sustainability and the scope of compounds. , 2008, Genome informatics. International Conference on Genome Informatics.

[55]  G. Wagner HOMOLOGUES, NATURAL KINDS AND THE EVOLUTION OF MODULARITY , 1996 .

[56]  Jessica A. Bolker,et al.  Modularity in Development and Why It Matters to Evo-Devo1 , 2000 .

[57]  S. Fortunato,et al.  Resolution limit in community detection , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[58]  Antónia Monteiro,et al.  Wings, Horns, and Butterfly Eyespots: How Do Complex Traits Evolve? , 2009, PLoS biology.

[59]  Oliver Ebenhöh,et al.  Expanding Metabolic Networks: Scopes of Compounds, Robustness, and Evolution , 2005, Journal of Molecular Evolution.

[60]  Adam M. Feist,et al.  The growing scope of applications of genome-scale metabolic reconstructions using Escherichia coli , 2008, Nature Biotechnology.

[61]  B. Palsson,et al.  Escherichia coli K-12 undergoes adaptive evolution to achieve in silico predicted optimal growth , 2002, Nature.

[62]  M. Ashburner,et al.  Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology , 2000, Nature Genetics.

[63]  David Kempe,et al.  Modularity-maximizing graph communities via mathematical programming , 2007, 0710.2533.

[64]  H. Ochman,et al.  Lateral gene transfer and the nature of bacterial innovation , 2000, Nature.

[65]  Santo Fortunato,et al.  Community detection in graphs , 2009, ArXiv.

[66]  Arend Hintze,et al.  Evolution of Complex Modular Biological Networks , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[67]  Uri Alon,et al.  Varying environments can speed up evolution , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[68]  D. Thieffry,et al.  Modularity in development and evolution. , 2000, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[69]  Claudio Castellano,et al.  Defining and identifying communities in networks. , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[70]  Juan Carlos Nuño,et al.  METATOOL: for studying metabolic networks , 1999, Bioinform..

[71]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  The power of modularity , 2000 .

[72]  B. Palsson,et al.  Properties of metabolic networks: structure versus function. , 2005, Biophysical journal.

[73]  B. Palsson,et al.  In silico predictions of Escherichia coli metabolic capabilities are consistent with experimental data , 2001, Nature Biotechnology.

[74]  G. Wagner,et al.  The road to modularity , 2007, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[75]  Bas Teusink,et al.  Co-Regulation of Metabolic Genes Is Better Explained by Flux Coupling Than by Network Distance , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..