Essential metabolism for a minimal cell

  1. Marian Breuer
  2. Tyler M Earnest
  3. Chuck Merryman
  4. Kim S Wise
  5. Lijie Sun
  6. Michaela R Lynott
  7. Clyde A Hutchison
  8. Hamilton O Smith
  9. John D Lapek
  10. David J Gonzalez
  11. Valérie de Crécy-Lagard
  12. Drago Haas
  13. Andrew D Hanson
  14. Piyush Labhsetwar
  15. John I Glass
  16. Zaida Luthey-Schulten  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, United States
  2. J Craig Venter Institute, United States
  3. University of California, San Diego, United States
  4. University of Florida, United States

Abstract

JCVI-syn3A, a robust minimal cell with a 543 kbp genome and 493 genes, provides a versatile platform to study the basics of life. Using the vast amount of experimental information available on its precursor, Mycoplasma mycoides capri, we assembled a near-complete metabolic network with 98% of enzymatic reactions supported by annotation or experiment. The model agrees well with genome-scale in vivo transposon mutagenesis experiments, showing a Matthews correlation coefficient of 0.59. The genes in the reconstruction have a high in vivo essentiality or quasi-essentiality of 92% (68% essential), compared to 79% in silico essentiality. This coherent model of the minimal metabolism in JCVI-syn3A at the same time also points toward specific open questions regarding the minimal genome of JCVI-syn3A, which still contains many genes of generic or completely unclear function. In particular, the model, its comparison to in vivo essentiality and proteomics data yield specific hypotheses on gene functions and metabolic capabilities; and provide suggestions for several further gene removals. In this way, the model and its accompanying data guide future investigations of the minimal cell. Finally, the identification of 30 essential genes with unclear function will motivate the search for new biological mechanisms beyond metabolism.

Data availability

Proteomics: data were uploaded to MassIVE (massive.ucsd.edu) with dataset identifier MSV000081687 and ProteomeXchange with dataset identifier PXD008159. All other new data are included in the manuscript and supporting files.

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Marian Breuer

    Department of Chemistry, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Tyler M Earnest

    Department of Chemistry, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1630-0791
  3. Chuck Merryman

    Synthetic Biology Group, J Craig Venter Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Kim S Wise

    Synthetic Biology Group, J Craig Venter Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Lijie Sun

    Synthetic Biology Group, J Craig Venter Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Michaela R Lynott

    Synthetic Biology Group, J Craig Venter Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Clyde A Hutchison

    Synthetic Biology Group, J Craig Venter Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    Clyde A Hutchison, is a consultant for Synthetic Genomics, Inc. (SGI), and holds SGI stock and/or stock options.
  8. Hamilton O Smith

    Synthetic Biology Group, J Craig Venter Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    Hamilton O Smith, is on the Board of Directors and cochief scientific officer of Synthetic Genomics, Inc. (SGI) and holds SGI stock and/or stock options.
  9. John D Lapek

    Department of Pharmacology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  10. David J Gonzalez

    Department of Pharmacology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  11. Valérie de Crécy-Lagard

    Department of Microbiology and Cell Science, University of Florida, Gainesville, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  12. Drago Haas

    Department of Microbiology and Cell Science, University of Florida, Gainesville, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  13. Andrew D Hanson

    Horticultural Sciences Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  14. Piyush Labhsetwar

    Department of Chemistry, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  15. John I Glass

    Synthetic Biology Group, J Craig Venter Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  16. Zaida Luthey-Schulten

    Center for the Physics of Living Cells, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, United States
    For correspondence
    zan@illinois.edu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9749-8367

Funding

National Science Foundation (PHY 1430124 Postdoctoral Fellowship)

  • Marian Breuer

National Institutes of Health (K12 GM06852)

  • John D Lapek

University of California (Office of the President)

  • David J Gonzalez

Ray Thomas Edwards Foundation

  • David J Gonzalez

J Craig Venter Institute

  • Chuck Merryman
  • Kim S Wise
  • Clyde A Hutchison
  • Hamilton O Smith
  • John I Glass

National Science Foundation (PHY 1430124)

  • Marian Breuer
  • Tyler M Earnest
  • Zaida Luthey-Schulten

National Science Foundation (MCB-1611711)

  • Valérie de Crécy-Lagard
  • Andrew D Hanson

National Science Foundation (MCB-1244570)

  • Marian Breuer
  • Tyler M Earnest
  • Zaida Luthey-Schulten

Department of Energy (ORNL 4000134575)

  • Piyush Labhsetwar

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2019, Breuer et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 18,006
    views
  • 2,330
    downloads
  • 137
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Marian Breuer
  2. Tyler M Earnest
  3. Chuck Merryman
  4. Kim S Wise
  5. Lijie Sun
  6. Michaela R Lynott
  7. Clyde A Hutchison
  8. Hamilton O Smith
  9. John D Lapek
  10. David J Gonzalez
  11. Valérie de Crécy-Lagard
  12. Drago Haas
  13. Andrew D Hanson
  14. Piyush Labhsetwar
  15. John I Glass
  16. Zaida Luthey-Schulten
(2019)
Essential metabolism for a minimal cell
eLife 8:e36842.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.36842

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.36842

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    Masaaki Uematsu, Jeremy M Baskin
    Tools and Resources

    Plasmid construction is central to life science research, and sequence verification is arguably its costliest step. Long-read sequencing has emerged as a competitor to Sanger sequencing, with the principal benefit that whole plasmids can be sequenced in a single run. Nevertheless, the current cost of nanopore sequencing is still prohibitive for routine sequencing during plasmid construction. We develop a computational approach termed Simple Algorithm for Very Efficient Multiplexing of Oxford Nanopore Experiments for You (SAVEMONEY) that guides researchers to mix multiple plasmids and subsequently computationally de-mixes the resultant sequences. SAVEMONEY defines optimal mixtures in a pre-survey step, and following sequencing, executes a post-analysis workflow involving sequence classification, alignment, and consensus determination. By using Bayesian analysis with prior probability of expected plasmid construction error rate, high-confidence sequences can be obtained for each plasmid in the mixture. Plasmids differing by as little as two bases can be mixed as a single sample for nanopore sequencing, and routine multiplexing of even six plasmids per 180 reads can still maintain high accuracy of consensus sequencing. SAVEMONEY should further democratize whole-plasmid sequencing by nanopore and related technologies, driving down the effective cost of whole-plasmid sequencing to lower than that of a single Sanger sequencing run.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Computational and Systems Biology
    Shinichi Kawaguchi, Xin Xu ... Toshie Kai
    Research Article

    Protein–protein interactions are fundamental to understanding the molecular functions and regulation of proteins. Despite the availability of extensive databases, many interactions remain uncharacterized due to the labor-intensive nature of experimental validation. In this study, we utilized the AlphaFold2 program to predict interactions among proteins localized in the nuage, a germline-specific non-membrane organelle essential for piRNA biogenesis in Drosophila. We screened 20 nuage proteins for 1:1 interactions and predicted dimer structures. Among these, five represented novel interaction candidates. Three pairs, including Spn-E_Squ, were verified by co-immunoprecipitation. Disruption of the salt bridges at the Spn-E_Squ interface confirmed their functional importance, underscoring the predictive model’s accuracy. We extended our analysis to include interactions between three representative nuage components—Vas, Squ, and Tej—and approximately 430 oogenesis-related proteins. Co-immunoprecipitation verified interactions for three pairs: Mei-W68_Squ, CSN3_Squ, and Pka-C1_Tej. Furthermore, we screened the majority of Drosophila proteins (~12,000) for potential interaction with the Piwi protein, a central player in the piRNA pathway, identifying 164 pairs as potential binding partners. This in silico approach not only efficiently identifies potential interaction partners but also significantly bridges the gap by facilitating the integration of bioinformatics and experimental biology.