The reconstruction software SimPheny™, version 1.7.1.1 (Genomatica Inc., San Diego, CA), was the software platform on which the model was built. The ORF draft annotations for M. barkeri Fusaro, downloaded from the ORNL website (http://genome.ornl.gov/microbial/mbar/ , February 2004), were used as a framework on which translated metabolic proteins were assigned to form GPR assignments. The draft genome consisted of 67 contigs of length 4.8 Mb and 5072 predicted candidate ORFs. Most GPR assignments were made from the genome annotation and the model was constructed on a pathway basis manually. Biochemical databases such as KEGG (http://www.genome.jp/kegg/ ), the Enzyme Nomenclature Database (http://www.chem.qmul.ac.uk/iubmb/enzyme/ ) and the MetaCyc database (http://metacyc.org/ ) were used as general guides for pathways and sources for previous genome annotations. When a reaction was entered into the model, the participating metabolites were characterized according to their chemical formula and charge determined for a cytosolic pH of 7.2, a value consistent with the intracellular range determined for methanogens (von Felten and Bachofen, 2000 (link); de Poorter et al, 2003 (link), 2005 (link)). Metabolite charge was determined using its pKa value. When the metabolite pKa was not available, charge was determined using the pKa of ionizable groups present in a metabolite. It should be mentioned that the charge of almost all metabolites in the network will not change for a pH increase or decrease of greater than ∼1.5 pH units based on the pKa values of the ionizable groups (most frequently, carboxyl groups and amines, pKa ∼4 and ∼9, respectively). The BLAST algorithm (Altschul et al, 1997 (link)) was implemented to infer gene function for enzymes needed to form complete pathways where no gene could be found in the annotation (see Supplementary information 1 for detailed BLAST results). Operon structure was also considered when assigning function when multiple genes having identical annotations were found. GPR associations were also made directly from biochemical evidence presented in journal publications and reviews (see Supplementary information 1 ). The Pathway Tools software, version 8.5 (http://bioinformatics.ai.sri.com/ptools/ ), was used to generate an automated metabolic reconstruction and the pathways were analyzed and used to form or confirm GPR associations after manual inspection. Organism specificity of the reactions was achieved by including (i) the unique metabolites present in M. barkeri, such as H4SPT (Grahame and DeMoll, 1996 (link)), methanofuran-b (Bobik et al, 1987 (link)), and coenzyme F420 (Raemakers-Franken et al, 1991 (link)), (ii) specific physiological cofactors, such as ADP for phosphofructokinase (Verhees et al, 2003 (link)) and coenzyme F420 as an electron donor in glutamate synthase (Raemakers-Franken et al, 1991 (link)), (iii) the measured stoichiometric values for proton and ion translocation reactions in the electron transport chain of M. barkeri (Deppenmeier, 2004 (link); Muller, 2004 (link)), and (iv) the necessary metabolic transport reactions for substrates and products of metabolism. Transport reactions were added to the network from the genome annotation or alternatively from physiological data (these were added when a metabolite was taken up into the cell or excreted into the media; Krzycki et al, 1985 (link); Bock et al, 1994 ; Buchenau and Thauer, 2004 (link)). All of the reactions entered into the network were both elementally and charged balanced and were labeled either reversible or irreversible. Reversibility was determined first from primary literature if an enzyme was characterized and additionally from thermodynamic considerations, for example, reactions that consume high-energy metabolites (ATP, GTP, etc.) are generally irreversible.
ORFs in the draft genome annotation that were determined to be previously unannotated were genes assigned functionality in the model which contained the words ‘hypothetical' or similar. Genes that were deemed misannotated were determined to be assigned a function considerably different or more specific than what was given in the draft annotation.
ORFs in the draft genome annotation that were determined to be previously unannotated were genes assigned functionality in the model which contained the words ‘hypothetical' or similar. Genes that were deemed misannotated were determined to be assigned a function considerably different or more specific than what was given in the draft annotation.