Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 24, 2026

Single-Cell RNA Sequencing of Mutant Whole Mouse Embryos: From the Epiblast to the End of Gastrulation
Published on: June 14, 2024
Selecting methods for draft GEM generation in multicellular eukaryotes: a comparative analysis
Natalia E Jiménez1,2, Mikael Espinoza3,4, Sebastián Mejías3,4
1Institute for Biological and Medical Engineering, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile. natalia.jimenez@uc.cl.
Automated genome-scale metabolic model (GEM) reconstruction tools show varied performance in multicellular eukaryotes. No single tool excels at both model functionality and eukaryotic-specific features, necessitating careful selection based on research goals.
Area of Science:
- Systems Biology
- Metabolic Engineering
- Computational Biology
Background:
- Genome-scale metabolic models (GEMs) are crucial for biological discovery and metabolic engineering.
- Existing automated GEM reconstruction methods are often not optimized for multicellular eukaryotes, with unclear performance.
- Evaluating these tools for eukaryotic systems is essential for advancing research.
Purpose of the Study:
- To comparatively analyze seven automated reconstruction tools for generating draft GEMs in multicellular eukaryotes.
- To assess tool performance based on network properties, functional representation, and annotation quality.
- To guide researchers in selecting appropriate tools for eukaryotic GEM reconstruction.
Main Methods:
- Seven automated reconstruction tools (AuReMe, CarveMe, merlin, ModelSEED, Pathway Tools, RAVEN, Reconstructor) were applied.
- The tools were tested on three multicellular eukaryotes: Aedes aegypti, CHO cell line (Cricetulus griseus), and Ectocarpus siliculosus.
- Evaluation metrics included network size, functionality, consistency, eukaryotic features, annotation quality, and execution time.
Main Results:
- Significant differences were observed among the tools in terms of functionality and representation of eukaryotic features.
- A trade-off exists between model functionality and the accurate representation of compartmentalization and organism-specific metabolism.
- No single tool demonstrated superiority across all evaluated metrics for eukaryotic GEM reconstruction.
Conclusions:
- The performance of automated GEM reconstruction tools varies considerably for multicellular eukaryotes.
- Researchers must consider a trade-off between model comprehensiveness and the accurate depiction of eukaryotic-specific biological processes.
- This comparative analysis provides a resource for selecting the most suitable tool based on specific research objectives and organism characteristics.
More Related Videos
08:46A Standardized Approach for Multispecies Purification of Mammalian Male Germ Cells by Mechanical Tissue Dissociation and Flow Cytometry
Published on: July 12, 2017
14:22Ordering Single Cells and Single Embryos in 3D Confinement: A New Device for High Content Screening
Published on: September 18, 2016