Difference between revisions of "Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Modeling propane"

m
m
 
(57 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 6: Line 6:
  
 
<style type="text/css">
 
<style type="text/css">
 +
 +
/* Navbar, text color changes if you are on this page */
 +
#modelingnav {
 +
  color: gray !important;
 +
}
  
 
/* Styles for navigation inside a page */
 
/* Styles for navigation inside a page */
Line 13: Line 18:
 
     position: fixed;
 
     position: fixed;
 
     left: 0;
 
     left: 0;
    top: 25%;
+
     width: 15%;
     width: 10%;
+
}
    z-index: 2;
+
.bottom{
 +
  bottom: 2%;
 
}
 
}
 
 
#sidenav > li > a {
 
#sidenav > li > a {
 
   padding-top: 1px;  
 
   padding-top: 1px;  
 
   padding-bottom: 0px;  
 
   padding-bottom: 0px;  
 
}
 
}
 
 
#sidenav > li > a > h3 {
 
#sidenav > li > a > h3 {
   margin-top:2px;
+
   margin-top:0px;
 
   padding-top: 1px;  
 
   padding-top: 1px;  
   padding-bottom: 1px;  
+
   padding-bottom: 0px;  
 
}
 
}
#sidenav > li > a > h4 {
+
#sidenav a:hover,
  margin-top:2px;
+
#sidenav a.active {
  padding-top: 1px;
+
    color: black !important;
  padding-bottom: 1px;  
+
 
}
 
}
</style>
 
  
      <ul id="sidenav" class="nav nav-stacked"><!-- nav-pills if we want rounded corners -->
+
/* Let's hide the navbar when the device is small! */
        <li><a href="#introduction"><h3>Introduction</h3></a></li>
+
@media screen and (max-width: 760px) {
        <li><a href="#mm"><h3>Materials<br/>and methods</h3></a></li>
+
  #sidenav { display: none; }
        <li><a href="#results"><h3>Results and<br/>implications</h3></a></li>
+
}
        <li><a href="#caractiv"><h4>Car-activation</h4></a></li>
+
        <li><a href="#bottlenecks"><h4>Bottlenecks</h4></a></li>
+
        <li><a href="#timecourse"><h4>Time course</h4></a></li>
+
        <li><a href="#sensitivity"><h4>Sensitivity</h4></a></li>
+
        <li><a href="#discussion"><h3>Discussion</h3></a></li>
+
       
+
  
        <!-- There was code for drilldown menu, saving it for if I need it later. Does it work? Not sure... -->
+
/* Background pic */
        <!--<li><a href="#" data-toggle="collapse" data-target="#drilldown-1">menu item 3</a>
+
.compscreens {
          <div style="padding-left:0px;">
+
    background-repeat: repeat-y;
          <ul id="drilldown-1" class="nav nav-pills nav-stacked collapse">
+
    background-image: url("https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/1/11/Aalto-Helsinki_modeling_background.png");
            <li><a href="#">menu item 1-1</a></li>
+
    background-size: 100%;
            <li><a href="#">menu item 1-2</a></li>
+
}
            <li><a href="#">menu item 1-3</a></li>
+
</style>
          </ul>
+
          </div>
+
        </li>-->
+
  
 +
      <ul id="sidenav" class="nav nav-stacked bottom"><!-- nav-pills if we want rounded corners -->
 +
        <li><a href="#" data-scroll="introduction"><h3>Introduction</h3></a></li>
 +
        <li><a href="#" data-scroll="mm"><h3>Materials and methods</h3></a></li>
 +
        <li><a href="#" data-scroll="results"><h3>Results and implications</h3></a></li>
 +
        <li><a href="#" data-scroll="discussion"><h3>Discussion</h3></a></li>
 +
        <li><a href="#" ><h3  style="border-top:solid;">To the top</h3></a></li>
 +
        <li><a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Modeling" ><h3>To the Parent Page</h3></a></li>
 
       </ul>
 
       </ul>
  
 +
<div class="compscreens">
 
<div class="inner-container">
 
<div class="inner-container">
 +
 +
<h1>Modeling the propane pathway</h1>
  
 
<!-- Introduction -->
 
<!-- Introduction -->
 +
<section id="introduction" class="active" data-anchor="introduction">
 +
<h2> Introduction </h2>
  
<h1 id="introduction"> Introduction </h1>
+
<p>Propane is a commonly used, convenient and clean-burning fuel, currently produced from non-renewable sources. Our project is about producing propane in bacteria, paving way for its sustainable production from renewable biomass. Ultimately, the pathway could be transferred to cyanobacteria, producing propane from CO\(_2\) and solar energy. </p>
  
<p>Propane is a commonly used, convenient and clean-burning fuel, currently produced from non-renewable sources. Our project is about producing propane in bacteria, paving way for its sustainable production from renewable biomass. Ultimately, the pathway could be transferred to cyanobacteria, producing propane from CO2 and solar energy. </p>
+
<p>The pathway is complicated and we had only educated guesses as to what might be the rate-limiting steps that should be improved to increase propane output. To find the bottlenecks and focus our engineering efforts on them, we built a mathematical model of the pathway using the kinetic data available for the enzymes.</p>
 +
</section>
 +
<!-- Introduction above -->
  
<p> In our mathematical model our goal is to grasp the important concepts underlying the experiments made in the lab, and to see how those concepts could help us produce more propane. By having a better understanding of the ideas that govern our project, we could see the influence of each compound in the reaction pathway and have a basis to make decisions that would have a long term impact in our results.</p>
 
  
 +
<!-- Materials and methods section below -->
 +
<section id="mm" data-anchor="mm">
 +
<h2>Materials and methods: Building the model</h2>
  
<h1 id="mm">Materials and methods: Building the model / our pathway</h1>
+
<p>We built a model of our propane pathway based on Michaelis-Menten enzyme kinetics. It is a way to model enzyme reactions which assumes that the change the enzyme causes is faster than the binding or release of the substrate by the enzyme.</p>
  
<p>We built a model of our propane pathway based on Michaelis-Menten enzyme kinetics. It is a basic way to model enzyme reactions that assumes that the change that enzyme causes is faster than the binding of the enzyme and releasing of the substrate.</p>
+
<figure id="fig1" style="margin-bottom:3%;">
 +
<div style="width:100%;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;"><a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/3/37/Aalto-Helsinki_pathway_horizontal_hbd.gif"><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/3/37/Aalto-Helsinki_pathway_horizontal_hbd.gif" style="max-width:800px;" /></a></div>
 +
<figcaption><b>Figure 1:</b> Propane pathway.</figcaption>
 +
</figure>
  
<p style="color:gray">--picture of pathway somewhere here--</p>
+
<p>Not all enzyme reactions in our pathway happen the same way, and thus they need to be modeled in various different ways. For more specific information about how each enzyme reaction is modeled and about the constants involved see our <a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Kinetics">page of enzyme kinetics</a>.</p>
  
<p>Not all enzyme reactions in our pathway happen the same way, and thus they need to be modeled with various different ways. For more specific information about how each enzyme reaction is modeled and about the constants involved see our <a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Kinetics">page of enzyme kinetics</a>.</p>
+
<p>Because of time restrictions we couldn't measure how much enzymes there are in our cells. This is why in modeling we had to use estimated values, namely 1e-6 mol/l, for all the enzyme concentrations. </p>
  
<p>For modeling this propane pathway we used <a href="http://www.copasi.org/tiki-view_articles.php">Copasi</a> and <a href="http://se.mathworks.com/">Matlab</a>.</p>
+
<p>For modeling this propane pathway we used <a href="http://copasi.org/">Copasi</a> and <a href="http://se.mathworks.com/">Matlab</a>.</p>
 +
</section>
 +
<!-- Materials and methods above -->
  
<h1 id="results">Results and implications</h1>
 
  
<p>Here text about our results in all subcategories:</p>
+
<!-- Results section above -->
 +
<section id="results" data-anchor="results">
 +
<h2>Results and implications</h2>
  
<h2 id="caractiv">Car-activation</h2>
+
<p>Our files for download: <a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/8/85/Aalto-Helsinki_propane_pathway_Hbd.zip">Copasi file with Hbd</a>, <a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/c/ca/Aalto-Helsinki_propane_pathway_fadB2.zip">copasi file with FadB2</a> and our <a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/e/ed/Aalto-Helsinki_bottleneck_plots.m" download>Matlab file</a>.</p>
  
<h2 id="bottlenecks">Bottlenecks: Comparing enzyme rates</h2>
 
  
<p>To know which are the rate limiting steps in our pathway, we compared the rates of the enzyme reactions. This was done by calculating the reaction speeds with different substrate concentrations. The reactions are explained in depth <a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Kinetics">here</a> and the obtained Michaelis-Menten equations tell us directly the reaction speeds. We implemented the code to plot these with Matlab, it is available here(<- download link).</p>
+
<h3 id="caractiv">CAR-activation</h3>
 +
 
 +
<p>One of the enzymes in our pathway, CAR, needs activation before it can function. To further understand how this affects the function of this enzyme we <a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Car-activation">modeled the reactions governing the activation</a>. To summarize the results: in most scenarios CAR is mostly in its active form. This is why we have assumed that it is all activated in the following calculations.</p>
 +
 
 +
 
 +
<h3 id="bottlenecks">Bottlenecks: Comparing enzyme rates</h3>
 +
 
 +
<p>To find out what the rate limiting steps in our pathway are, we compared the rates of the enzyme reactions. This was done by calculating the reaction speeds with different substrate concentrations. The reactions are explained in depth <a href="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/Kinetics">here</a> and the estimated Michaelis-Menten rate equations tell us directly the reaction speeds. We implemented the <a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/e/ed/Aalto-Helsinki_bottleneck_plots.m" download>code to plot these with Matlab</a>.</p>
  
 
<p>FadB2 reaction is reversible in our model but for this we approximated it as irreversible. This yields better results for it than in reality.</p>
 
<p>FadB2 reaction is reversible in our model but for this we approximated it as irreversible. This yields better results for it than in reality.</p>
  
<p style="color:gray">--pic of results here--</p>
+
<figure id="fig2" style="margin-bottom:3%;">
 +
<div style="width:80%;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;"><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/d/dd/Aalto-Helsinki_Michaelis_plots.png" style="max-width:100%;" /></div>
 +
<figcaption><b>Figure 2:</b> Michaelis-Menten reaction rate plots for our enzymes.</figcaption>
 +
</figure>
  
<p>The results shown above tell us that FadB2 is really bad enzyme and quite a large bottleneck in our reaction. This find caused us to change it to Hdb; an enzyme with same function and reportedly better performance.</p>
+
<figure id="fig3" style="margin-bottom:3%;">
 +
<div style="width:80%;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;"><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/a/aa/Aalto-Helsinki_bottleneck_both.png" style="max-width:100%;" /></div>
 +
<figcaption><b>Figure 3:</b> Illustrative figure of the bottleneck results of our pathway.</figcaption>
 +
</figure>
  
<p>The plot also shows us that Ado is really bad enzyme, even though we use the mutated version with better performance than the original one (link to this?). To ease Ado-bottleneck, we put the construct containing it to the backbone that had higher copy number.</p>
+
<p>The results shown in <a href="#fig2">figure 2</a> tell us that FadB2 is a really inefficient enzyme and one of the largest bottlenecks in our pathway. This caused us to change it to Hbd; an enzyme with same function and reportedly better performance.</p>
  
<p>Car isn’t very good enzyme either, and unfortunately we couldn’t do anything to make it’s performance better because it was in different construct than Ado. We had ordered our constructs before we knew the bottleneck results, and because of time restrictions we had to cope with what we had.</p>
+
<p>The plot also shows us that ADO isn't a good one either. To ease the ADO bottleneck, we put the construct containing its gene to the backbone that had a higher copy number, to increase its relative concentration in the cell.</p>
  
<p>We could also confirm the results checking the fluxes through reactions and running parameter scan for different enzymes with Copasi. After identifying one bottleneck this way removed that enzyme from our model of the reaction pathway and repeating the calculations.</p>
+
<p>CAR isn’t the best enzyme in our pathway, and unfortunately we couldn’t do anything to make it’s performance better because it was in a different construct than ADO. We had ordered our constructs before we knew the bottleneck results and because of time restrictions we had to cope with what we had, but based on the obtained results we can deduce a better ordering of constructs than we now have. We should put as many of the slowest enzymes as possible to the higher copy number backbone.</p>
  
<p>Based on the results we can further deduce better ordering of constructs than we now have. To the higher copy number backbone we should put as many of the slowest enzymes as possible.</p>
+
<p>We came to the same conclusions by checking the reaction fluxes and running parameter scans for different enzyme amounts with Copasi. Thus we identified and ranked the different bottlenecks in our pathway.</p>
  
<p>After getting these results we performed the bottleneck analysis again out of curiosity with relative enzyme amounts. When before we had all the enzyme concentrations to be 1e-6 mol/l, now we scaled them to correspond the different copy numbers of different backbones. It is good to remember that we don’t have real information how much there are enzymes in the cell so the actual values of these might not be right. Despite that this approach gives us good idea how one could improve the pathway in the future.</p>
+
<p style="padding-top:1%;">After getting these results we performed the bottleneck analysis again out of curiosity with relative enzyme amounts. When before we had all the enzyme concentrations to be 1e-6 mol/l, now we scaled them to correspond to the different copy numbers of different backbones. We had put CAR-construct into pSB6A1 (ORI: pMB1, copynumber: 15-20) and ADO-construct into pCDFDuet-1 (ORI: CloDF13, copynumber: 20-40). Based on this we approximated that there is about 1.5 times more of those enzymes that are in ADO construct; see <a href="#fig4">figure 4</a> for results. It is good to remember that we don’t have accurate information on how much enzymes there are in the cell so the actual values might not be right. Despite that this approach gives us a good idea of how one could improve the pathway in the future.</p>
  
<p style="color:gray">--pic here--</p>
+
<figure id="fig4" style="margin-bottom:3%;">
 +
<div style="width:80%;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;"><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/b/ba/Aalto-Helsinki_Michaelis_plots_varying_enzymes.png" style="max-width:100%;" /></div>
 +
<figcaption><b>Figure 4:</b> Michaelis-Menten reaction rate plots with different enzyme concentrations based on the backbone copy numbers</figcaption>
 +
</figure>
  
<h2 id="timecourse">Time course</h2>
 
  
<p>From time course analysis we can have some kind of idea how much propane our system is able to produce. We performed this analysis with copasi. Since we knew from the bottleneck analysis that FadB2 should be changed to Hdb, we considered only the latter in our Copasi file. Also we had different amounts of enzymes based on which backbone they were. For Car we knew from our previous analysis that the reaction reaches equilibrium quite fast and then 100% of it was active, so we could just put it’s value as constant, as for all other enzymes too.</p>
+
<h3 >Sensitivity analysis</h3>
  
<p>With step length of 1 minute and total time 100 min, we got that XX of propane was produced, see the picture below.</p>
+
<p>We performed sensitivity analysis of our pathway model to see the robustness of different parameters. We performed this analysis with the aid of Copasi, which has a ready task for it. Further, we performed this analysis based on both parameters and initial concentrations. We did the analysis with different enzyme concentrations based on the backbone copy numbers.</p>
  
<p style="color:gray;">--pic here--</p>
+
<p>Relative sensitivities are defined as \[\frac{p}{[S]}\frac{d[S]}{dp},\] where \([S]\) is substrate concentration and \(p\) is the parameter by which we wish to calculate the sensitivities. A small sensitivity coefficient with respect to a parameter tells us that the behaviour is robust to the perturbations. If the parameter is large, we have gained knowledge of a control point. There interventions will have significant effects.</p>
  
<p>It is good to remember that this doesn’t tell us the exact value of propane produced, rather just an idea of the order of magnitude. We don’t know the amount of enzymes in our cell so we had to estimate it. Also, our model has some simplifications that very possibly affect the outcome.</p>
+
<p>When we calculated the scaled sensitivities in regarding to initial concentrations, butyryl-CoA was the most sensitive species of our reaction pathway. Hbd and NADPH influenced it positively (5.14 and 1.89) and YciA had a big negative influence (5.1). This doesn't really matter for us, since this doesn't have any effect on propane production. From the results we could see that propane was positively sensitive to ADO, CAR, Hbd and NADPH. This confirms the main bottlenecks and also suggests that NADPH affects our propane production. To improve the pathway in the future one could add mechanisms to create higher amounts of it in the cell.</p>
  
<h2 id="sensitivity">Sensitivity analysis</h2>
+
<p style="font-size:13px;">Here you can download the <a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/b/b3/Aalto-Helsinki_sensitivity_initConcentrations.txt" download>sensitivity results for initial concentrations</a> or our whole <a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/8/85/Aalto-Helsinki_propane_pathway_Hbd.zip">copasi file with Hbd</a>.</p>
  
<p>We performed sensitivity analysis of our model to see the robustness of different parameters in our model. We performed this analysis with aid of Copasi, which has a ready task for it. Further, we performed this analysis based on both parameters/(constants? is it better said like that?) and initial concentrations.</p>
+
<p>The relative sensitivities when calculated based on the parameters (i.e kinetic constants) tell us the familiar tale of Hbd, CAR and ADO being the most influential enzymes in our pathway. The greatest single sensitivity (5.14) was again for Butyryl-Coa and caused by Hbd's \(K_{cat}\). YciA's \(K_{cat}\) has the smallest sensitivity value (-5.1). The results suggest that we could improve propane production by finding substitutive enzymes with better kinetic constants and performances.</p>
  
<p style="color:gray;">--pic of parameter results--</p>
+
<p style="font-size:13px;">Here you can download the <a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/3/38/Aalto-Helsinki_sensitivity_parameters.txt" download>sensitivity results for parameters</a> or our whole <a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/8/85/Aalto-Helsinki_propane_pathway_Hbd.zip">copasi file with Hbd</a>.</p>
  
<p>These results confirm what we already knew of our pathway: the main bottlenecks. We could improve propane production by finding substitutive enzymes with better kinetic constants and performances.</p>
 
  
<p style="color:gray;">--pic of concentration results--</p>
 
  
<p>The other results show that not very surprisingly the concentration of NADP and NADPH (among the known bottleneck concentrations, this could be said better) affect a lot our propane production. To improve this in future, one could add mechanisms of creating these in the cell in higher amounts.</p>
+
<h3 id="timecourse">Time course</h3>
  
<h1 id="discussion">Discussion</h1>
+
<p>From time course analysis we can have some kind of idea of how much propane our system is able to produce. We performed this analysis with Copasi. Since we knew from the bottleneck calculations that FadB2 should be changed to Hbd, we considered only the latter. Also we had different amounts of enzymes based on which backbone they were.</p>
  
 +
<p>In our <a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/8/85/Aalto-Helsinki_propane_pathway_Hbd.zip">copasi file</a> we don't have the competing enzymes that also eat butyraldehyde, the last substrate before propane. This means that the values obtained here might be higher than in reality.</p>
  
 +
<p>With step length of 0.1 minutes and total time 100 min, we got for propane concentration 6.8e-07 mol/l.</p>
  
 +
<p>It is good to remember that this doesn’t tell us the exact value of propane produced, rather just an idea of the order of magnitude. We don’t know the amount of enzymes in our cell so we had to estimate it. Also, our model has some simplifications that very possibly affect the outcome.</p>
 +
 +
<p>The predicted amount of propane produced isn't very high. To produce propane more efficiently in the future, we would need to greatly improve the performance of our pathway. This could be done by taking a look into the bottlenecks of our pathway and other limiting factors such as NADPH.</p>
 +
</section>
 +
<!-- Results section ends -->
 +
 +
 +
<!-- Discussion section begins -->
 +
<section id="discussion" data-anchor="discussion">
 +
<h2>Discussion</h2>
 +
 +
<p>If we had had time we could have measured the kinetic constants ourselves. This might have given us a bit more accurate results, but isn't really necessary since we have reliable sources for most of our constants. Perhaps the only part of our model that would have gained a lot from this would have been our mutated ADO; a recently found enzyme that isn't yet thoroughly researched. Right now we had to approximate its performance very crudely.</p>
 +
 +
<p>We could have gained a bit more accuracy for modeling if we knew the enzyme concentrations in the cell. Unfortunately we couldn't measure these due to time restrictions, but this doesn't affect our modeling results very much. The bottleneck results are based on the properties of the enzymes, not the amounts of them. </p>
 +
 +
<p>We have made some simplifying assumptions that might have some minor effects on the results, mainly assuming some reversible reactions irreversible. This shouldn't however be too much of a problem since those reactions are strongly forward-favored according to their kinetic properties. </p>
 +
 +
<p style="padding-bottom:8%;margin-bottom:0;">In the future, our model could be improved by taking other reactions that happen in the cell into account. In our model we concentrated only on properties of our pathway, but for example NADPH and acetyl-CoA production are something that happen outside of the pathway and has a strong influence on the propane production.</p>
 +
</section>
  
 +
</div>
 
</div>
 
</div>
 
</div></div></div> <!--These are the closing tags for div id="mainContainer" and div id="contentContainer". The corresponding opening tags appear in the template that is {{included}} at the top of this page.-->
 
</div></div></div> <!--These are the closing tags for div id="mainContainer" and div id="contentContainer". The corresponding opening tags appear in the template that is {{included}} at the top of this page.-->
 +
<p style="margin-bottom:0">
 +
 +
  
</body>
+
<!-- Scirpt for beautiful scrolling inside the page: smooth transitions and we show in what section the reader is. -->
</html>
+
<script src="https://2015.igem.org/Team:Aalto-Helsinki/ResponsiveNavScript?action=raw&ctype=text/javascript"></script>

Latest revision as of 05:56, 17 September 2015

Modeling the propane pathway

Introduction

Propane is a commonly used, convenient and clean-burning fuel, currently produced from non-renewable sources. Our project is about producing propane in bacteria, paving way for its sustainable production from renewable biomass. Ultimately, the pathway could be transferred to cyanobacteria, producing propane from CO\(_2\) and solar energy.

The pathway is complicated and we had only educated guesses as to what might be the rate-limiting steps that should be improved to increase propane output. To find the bottlenecks and focus our engineering efforts on them, we built a mathematical model of the pathway using the kinetic data available for the enzymes.

Materials and methods: Building the model

We built a model of our propane pathway based on Michaelis-Menten enzyme kinetics. It is a way to model enzyme reactions which assumes that the change the enzyme causes is faster than the binding or release of the substrate by the enzyme.

Figure 1: Propane pathway.

Not all enzyme reactions in our pathway happen the same way, and thus they need to be modeled in various different ways. For more specific information about how each enzyme reaction is modeled and about the constants involved see our page of enzyme kinetics.

Because of time restrictions we couldn't measure how much enzymes there are in our cells. This is why in modeling we had to use estimated values, namely 1e-6 mol/l, for all the enzyme concentrations.

For modeling this propane pathway we used Copasi and Matlab.

Results and implications

Our files for download: Copasi file with Hbd, copasi file with FadB2 and our Matlab file.

CAR-activation

One of the enzymes in our pathway, CAR, needs activation before it can function. To further understand how this affects the function of this enzyme we modeled the reactions governing the activation. To summarize the results: in most scenarios CAR is mostly in its active form. This is why we have assumed that it is all activated in the following calculations.

Bottlenecks: Comparing enzyme rates

To find out what the rate limiting steps in our pathway are, we compared the rates of the enzyme reactions. This was done by calculating the reaction speeds with different substrate concentrations. The reactions are explained in depth here and the estimated Michaelis-Menten rate equations tell us directly the reaction speeds. We implemented the code to plot these with Matlab.

FadB2 reaction is reversible in our model but for this we approximated it as irreversible. This yields better results for it than in reality.

Figure 2: Michaelis-Menten reaction rate plots for our enzymes.
Figure 3: Illustrative figure of the bottleneck results of our pathway.

The results shown in figure 2 tell us that FadB2 is a really inefficient enzyme and one of the largest bottlenecks in our pathway. This caused us to change it to Hbd; an enzyme with same function and reportedly better performance.

The plot also shows us that ADO isn't a good one either. To ease the ADO bottleneck, we put the construct containing its gene to the backbone that had a higher copy number, to increase its relative concentration in the cell.

CAR isn’t the best enzyme in our pathway, and unfortunately we couldn’t do anything to make it’s performance better because it was in a different construct than ADO. We had ordered our constructs before we knew the bottleneck results and because of time restrictions we had to cope with what we had, but based on the obtained results we can deduce a better ordering of constructs than we now have. We should put as many of the slowest enzymes as possible to the higher copy number backbone.

We came to the same conclusions by checking the reaction fluxes and running parameter scans for different enzyme amounts with Copasi. Thus we identified and ranked the different bottlenecks in our pathway.

After getting these results we performed the bottleneck analysis again out of curiosity with relative enzyme amounts. When before we had all the enzyme concentrations to be 1e-6 mol/l, now we scaled them to correspond to the different copy numbers of different backbones. We had put CAR-construct into pSB6A1 (ORI: pMB1, copynumber: 15-20) and ADO-construct into pCDFDuet-1 (ORI: CloDF13, copynumber: 20-40). Based on this we approximated that there is about 1.5 times more of those enzymes that are in ADO construct; see figure 4 for results. It is good to remember that we don’t have accurate information on how much enzymes there are in the cell so the actual values might not be right. Despite that this approach gives us a good idea of how one could improve the pathway in the future.

Figure 4: Michaelis-Menten reaction rate plots with different enzyme concentrations based on the backbone copy numbers

Sensitivity analysis

We performed sensitivity analysis of our pathway model to see the robustness of different parameters. We performed this analysis with the aid of Copasi, which has a ready task for it. Further, we performed this analysis based on both parameters and initial concentrations. We did the analysis with different enzyme concentrations based on the backbone copy numbers.

Relative sensitivities are defined as \[\frac{p}{[S]}\frac{d[S]}{dp},\] where \([S]\) is substrate concentration and \(p\) is the parameter by which we wish to calculate the sensitivities. A small sensitivity coefficient with respect to a parameter tells us that the behaviour is robust to the perturbations. If the parameter is large, we have gained knowledge of a control point. There interventions will have significant effects.

When we calculated the scaled sensitivities in regarding to initial concentrations, butyryl-CoA was the most sensitive species of our reaction pathway. Hbd and NADPH influenced it positively (5.14 and 1.89) and YciA had a big negative influence (5.1). This doesn't really matter for us, since this doesn't have any effect on propane production. From the results we could see that propane was positively sensitive to ADO, CAR, Hbd and NADPH. This confirms the main bottlenecks and also suggests that NADPH affects our propane production. To improve the pathway in the future one could add mechanisms to create higher amounts of it in the cell.

Here you can download the sensitivity results for initial concentrations or our whole copasi file with Hbd.

The relative sensitivities when calculated based on the parameters (i.e kinetic constants) tell us the familiar tale of Hbd, CAR and ADO being the most influential enzymes in our pathway. The greatest single sensitivity (5.14) was again for Butyryl-Coa and caused by Hbd's \(K_{cat}\). YciA's \(K_{cat}\) has the smallest sensitivity value (-5.1). The results suggest that we could improve propane production by finding substitutive enzymes with better kinetic constants and performances.

Here you can download the sensitivity results for parameters or our whole copasi file with Hbd.

Time course

From time course analysis we can have some kind of idea of how much propane our system is able to produce. We performed this analysis with Copasi. Since we knew from the bottleneck calculations that FadB2 should be changed to Hbd, we considered only the latter. Also we had different amounts of enzymes based on which backbone they were.

In our copasi file we don't have the competing enzymes that also eat butyraldehyde, the last substrate before propane. This means that the values obtained here might be higher than in reality.

With step length of 0.1 minutes and total time 100 min, we got for propane concentration 6.8e-07 mol/l.

It is good to remember that this doesn’t tell us the exact value of propane produced, rather just an idea of the order of magnitude. We don’t know the amount of enzymes in our cell so we had to estimate it. Also, our model has some simplifications that very possibly affect the outcome.

The predicted amount of propane produced isn't very high. To produce propane more efficiently in the future, we would need to greatly improve the performance of our pathway. This could be done by taking a look into the bottlenecks of our pathway and other limiting factors such as NADPH.

Discussion

If we had had time we could have measured the kinetic constants ourselves. This might have given us a bit more accurate results, but isn't really necessary since we have reliable sources for most of our constants. Perhaps the only part of our model that would have gained a lot from this would have been our mutated ADO; a recently found enzyme that isn't yet thoroughly researched. Right now we had to approximate its performance very crudely.

We could have gained a bit more accuracy for modeling if we knew the enzyme concentrations in the cell. Unfortunately we couldn't measure these due to time restrictions, but this doesn't affect our modeling results very much. The bottleneck results are based on the properties of the enzymes, not the amounts of them.

We have made some simplifying assumptions that might have some minor effects on the results, mainly assuming some reversible reactions irreversible. This shouldn't however be too much of a problem since those reactions are strongly forward-favored according to their kinetic properties.

In the future, our model could be improved by taking other reactions that happen in the cell into account. In our model we concentrated only on properties of our pathway, but for example NADPH and acetyl-CoA production are something that happen outside of the pathway and has a strong influence on the propane production.