SysBioChalmers / yeast-GEM

The consensus GEM for Saccharomyces cerevisiae
http://sysbiochalmers.github.io/yeast-GEM/
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
94 stars 44 forks source link

feat: new reactions based on latest gene annotation #38

Open hongzhonglu opened 6 years ago

hongzhonglu commented 6 years ago

@edkerk @BenjaSanchez , Dear both, in next phase, I want to focus on adding new GPRs into model. The followed is the detailed step: 1) Add new GPRs by merge of ise926, yeast7.6 and ito980; 2) Add new GPRs based on the yeast models and gene annotation in reactome, biocyc ,kegg, SGD and uniprotKB;

BenjaSanchez commented 6 years ago

@hongzhonglu looks good to me. Some additional comments:

hongzhonglu commented 6 years ago

@BenjaSanchez Very good suggestion! For issues #11, #18, #37, I have nearly completed them. I will share with you later. For issue #38, it mainly used to improve model coverage. To make the update clear, I put these items together, so that everyone could understand it clearly. Let us do it step by step.

hongzhonglu commented 6 years ago

@feiranl @BenjaSanchez @edkerk Dears, These days, I just further check the new gene-protein-reactions which should be added into the model. I find some interesting things, for example, As for gene "YBR136W", it has EC number 2.7.11.1, but this EC number could be connected with so many reactions (https://www.brenda-enzymes.org/enzyme.php?ecno=2.7.11.1#NATURAL SUBSTRATES, the same result can also be found in MetaNetX). Then it will become difficult for us to choose. How do you think of this question? Thanks in advance!

edkerk commented 6 years ago

EC 2.7.11.1 is a protein kinase, and these kind of enzymes would fall outside of the scope of a purely metabolic model (which is what Yeast7 is and Yeast8 still will be?). So you can leave out GPRs where the reaction is a protein-modifying reaction (kinase, phosphatase, ubiquitine ligase, etc.).

Any other questionable ones?

hongzhonglu commented 6 years ago

Great thanks! Yeast8 will be a purely metabolic model, so we can excluded some genes. Will let you know if I find other doubted genes.

hongzhonglu commented 6 years ago

@BenjaSanchez @edkerk @feiranl @zhengmingzhu In next step, we will merge the new GPRs into the yeast model. So how we add them? The followed code is from yeast-ME model. I think that we can refer it. https://github.com/hongzhonglu/Yeast-ME-GEM/blob/master/ComplementaryScripts/Reconstruction-Laptop/addNewRxns.m Do you have any other suggestion?

elsemman commented 6 years ago

@BenjaSanchez @edkerk @feiranl @zhengmingzhu This function is from RAVEN toolbox.

hongzhonglu commented 6 years ago

@elsemman Thanks for your remind. So we can use it directly.

hongzhonglu commented 6 years ago

@all, this issue will be focus on adding new GPRs based on model merge and latest genome annotation as @BenjaSanchez suggested. So it will be clear for us to tack it.

edkerk commented 6 years ago

As @elsemman mentioned, addRxns from RAVEN can be used for this. Please use release 2.0.0-rc.1 A few points:

hongzhonglu commented 6 years ago

@edkerk Thanks for the detailed comments! Presently, I have evaluate each reaction connected with new gene but not for each metabolite in these reactions. We can further check these metabolites and screen the new metabolites compared with present model.

BenjaSanchez commented 6 years ago

@hongzhonglu what do you mean here by "model merge"? I thought that was already included in issue #13?

BenjaSanchez commented 6 years ago

@hongzhonglu also the part of "genome annotation" I thought was already covered by issue #60. So it looks that this issue is redundant. If so could we close it?

hongzhonglu commented 6 years ago

@BenjaSanchez This issue can be focused on addition of new GPRs based on the 5 different database! This part is on going now.

BenjaSanchez commented 6 years ago

@hongzhonglu I see, then this issue focuses on adding whereas issue #60 focuses on correcting. I have renamed both issues to reflect this, just make sure of committing separately when you address each one of the issues. Cheers!

BenjaSanchez commented 6 years ago

update: PR #142 added all new rxns to devel based on annotation from 5 different databases. This issue will hence be closed on the next release.

BenjaSanchez commented 6 years ago

As discussed in #149, even though PR #142 added all new genes + rxns associated to them, it did not add new rxns connected to the old genes already present in the model. This issue will therefore be reopened until we include those.