Linking genotypic and phenotypic changes in the LTEE using metabolomics

  1. Department of Genetics, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA
  2. Human Genetics Institute of New Jersey, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA
  3. Waksman Institute, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA
  4. Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA

Editors

  • Reviewing Editor
    John McCutcheon
    Arizona State University, Tempe, United States of America
  • Senior Editor
    Christian Landry
    Université Laval, Québec, Canada

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary

Favate et al. measure the relative levels of metabolites in 12 Escherichia coli strains isolated from different replicate populations after 50,000 generations of the Lenski long-term laboratory evolution experiment. They use untargeted LC/MS methods that include standards and report both positive and negative ionization mode measurements. They initially use principal component analysis (PCA) to broadly compare how the metabolomes of these strains are similar and different. Then, they describe several instances where the changes in metabolite abundance they see in specific pathways correlate with mutations that lead to changes in the expression of genes that encode enzymes in those pathways.

Strengths

The statistical analyses and presentation of the high-throughput data are excellent. The most compelling results are communicated in wonderful figures that integrate their measurements of metabolite levels in this study with results from a prior study they conducted looking at changes in gene expression levels in the same bacterial strains. These sections include the ones describing large increases in NAD(P) pools due to mutations in nadR, changes in the levels of arginine and related compounds due to mutations in argR, and changes in metabolites from glycolysis and the TCA cycle related to iclR and arcB.

Weaknesses

Showing that A-2 and especially A-3 are outliers in the PCA analysis is useful, but it may be hiding other interesting signals in the data. The other strains are remarkably colinear on these plots, hinting that if the outliers were removed, one main component would emerge along which they are situated. It also seems possible that this additional analysis step would allow the second dimension to better differentiate them in a way that is interesting with respect to their mutator status or mutations in key metabolic or regulatory genes.

There is a missed opportunity to connect some key results to what is known about LTEE mutations that reduce the activity of pykF (pyruvate kinase I). This gene is mutated in all 12 LTEE populations, and often these mutations are frameshifts or transposon insertions that should completely knock out its activity. At first glance, inactivating an enzyme for a step in glycolysis does not make sense when the nutrient source in the growth medium is glucose, even though PykF is only one of two isozymes E. coli encodes for this reaction. There has been speculation that inactivating pykF increases the concentration of phosphoenolpyruvate (PEP) in cells and that this can lead to increased rates of glucose import because PEP is used by the phosphotransferase system of E. coli to import glucose (see https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.20629). The current study has confirmed the higher PEP levels, which is consistent with this model.

In the introduction, the papers cited to show the importance of changes in metabolism for adaptation do not seem to fit the focus of this study very well. They stress production of toxins and secondary metabolites, which do not seem to be mechanisms that are at work in the LTEE. I can think of two areas of background that would be more relevant: (1) studies of how bacterial metabolism evolves in adaptive laboratory evolution (ALE) experiments to optimize metabolic fluxes toward biomass production (for example, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01149 ), and (2) discussions of how cross-feeding, metabolic niche specialization, and metabolic interdependence evolve in microbial communities, including in other evolution experiments (for example, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0708504105 and https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00036-12).

Impact and Significance

While there has been past speculation about the effects of LTEE mutations on metabolism, this study measures changes in the levels of metabolites in related metabolic pathways for the first time. Therefore, it provides useful information about how metabolism evolves, in general, and will also be a useful resource for those studying other aspects of the LTEE related to metabolism, such as contingency in the evolution of citrate utilization.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

This preprint presents a compelling study examining the relationship between genotypic changes and phenotypic traits in bacteria over an extended period using the Long-Term Evolution Experiment (LTEE) as a model. The primary advances in methodology include employing high-resolution mass spectrometry for comprehensive metabolic profiling and combining it with previous gene expression and DNA sequencing datasets. This approach provides insight into how specific genetic mutations can alter metabolic pathways over 50,000 generations, enabling a deeper understanding of how genetic changes lead to observed differences in evolved bacterial strains. The findings reveal that evolved bacteria possess more diverse metabolic profiles compared to their ancestors, suggesting that these populations have uniquely adapted to their environment. The work also attempts to uncover the molecular basis for this adaptive evolution, demonstrating how specific genetic changes have influenced the bacteria's metabolic pathways.

Overall, this is a significant and well-executed research study. It offers new insights into the complex relationship between genetic changes and observable traits in evolving populations and utilizes metabolomics in the LTEE, a novel approach in combination with RNA-seq and mutation datasets.

However, the paper's overall clarity is lacking. It is spread too thin and covers many topics without a clear focus. I strongly recommend a substantial rewrite of the manuscript, emphasizing structure and readability. The science is well executed, but the current writing does not do it justice.

  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  2. Wellcome Trust
  3. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
  4. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation