Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: have SLIMEr as option #289

Open
4 tasks
edkerk opened this issue Dec 11, 2021 · 0 comments
Open
4 tasks

feat: have SLIMEr as option #289

edkerk opened this issue Dec 11, 2021 · 0 comments

Comments

@edkerk
Copy link
Member

edkerk commented Dec 11, 2021

Description of the issue:

While there are benefits in having SLIME reactions, they can also be a nuisance. An example is when yeast-GEM is used as template model for generating other models with different acyl-chains. It would be ideal if the SLIME reactions could be transformed into a simpler representation.

Suggested solution:

Alternatives are the permissive and restrictive approaches identified in the SLIMEr paper. To provide an alternative to the flexibility of SLIMEr, it is most suitable to transform the lipid reactions to a restrictive approach:
image
Here, generic acyl-CoA and fatty acyl acid pseudometabolites are formed from the chain-specific metabolites. These pseudometabolites are then used whenever an acyl-CoA is used or produced in a reaction. With this approach there are no longer chain-specific reactions in lipid metabolism.

A function could search the model for SLIMEr reactions and acyl-chain involving reactions and replace this with the generic version. SLIMEr --> restrictive is relatively straightforward, while the other direction is much more complex, and would largely mimick reapplying SLIMEr's functions. So conversion in 1 direction would suffice.

Alternative ideas are also welcome!

I hereby confirm that I have:

  • Tested my code with all requirements for running the model
  • Done this analysis in the main branch of the repository
  • Checked that a similar issue does not exist already
  • If needed, asked first in the Gitter chat room about the issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant