venturelli1

v1

x1 = xBH

v10

x10 = xCH

v11

x11 = xDP

v12

x12 = xER

v2

x2 = xCA

v3

x3 = xBU

v4

x4 = xPC

v5

x5 = xBO

v6

x6 = xBV

v7

x7 = xBT

v8

x8 = xEL

v9

x9 = xFP

Global parameters

Assignment rules

fBU = xBU / (xBH + xCA + xBU + xPC + xBO + xBV + xBT + xEL + xFP + xCH + xDP + xER)

fBH = xBH / (xBH + xCA + xBU + xPC + xBO + xBV + xBT + xEL + xFP + xCH + xDP + xER)

fBV = xBV / (xBH + xCA + xBU + xPC + xBO + xBV + xBT + xEL + xFP + xCH + xDP + xER)

fPC = xPC / (xBH + xCA + xBU + xPC + xBO + xBV + xBT + xEL + xFP + xCH + xDP + xER)

fER = xER / (xBH + xCA + xBU + xPC + xBO + xBV + xBT + xEL + xFP + xCH + xDP + xER)

fBO = xBO / (xBH + xCA + xBU + xPC + xBO + xBV + xBT + xEL + xFP + xCH + xDP + xER)

fCH = xCH / (xBH + xCA + xBU + xPC + xBO + xBV + xBT + xEL + xFP + xCH + xDP + xER)

fBT = xBT / (xBH + xCA + xBU + xPC + xBO + xBV + xBT + xEL + xFP + xCH + xDP + xER)

fEL = xEL / (xBH + xCA + xBU + xPC + xBO + xBV + xBT + xEL + xFP + xCH + xDP + xER)

fFP = xFP / (xBH + xCA + xBU + xPC + xBO + xBV + xBT + xEL + xFP + xCH + xDP + xER)

fDP = xDP / (xBH + xCA + xBU + xPC + xBO + xBV + xBT + xEL + xFP + xCH + xDP + xER)

fCA = xCA / (xBH + xCA + xBU + xPC + xBO + xBV + xBT + xEL + xFP + xCH + xDP + xER)

Function definitions

event48

Trigger: gt(time, 48)

Delay: 0

Assignments:

  • xBO = 0.05 * xBO
  • xBV = 0.05 * xBV
  • xBT = 0.05 * xBT
  • xEL = 0.05 * xEL
  • xBH = 0.05 * xBH
  • xCA = 0.05 * xCA
  • xBU = 0.05 * xBU
  • xPC = 0.05 * xPC
  • xFP = 0.05 * xFP
  • xCH = 0.05 * xCH
  • xDP = 0.05 * xDP
  • xER = 0.05 * xER

event24

Trigger: gt(time, 24)

Delay: 0

Assignments:

  • xBH = 0.05 * xBH
  • xCA = 0.05 * xCA
  • xBU = 0.05 * xBU
  • xPC = 0.05 * xPC
  • xBO = 0.05 * xBO
  • xBV = 0.05 * xBV
  • xBT = 0.05 * xBT
  • xEL = 0.05 * xEL
  • xFP = 0.05 * xFP
  • xCH = 0.05 * xCH
  • xDP = 0.05 * xDP
  • xER = 0.05 * xER

Note that constraints are not enforced in simulations. It remains the responsibility of the user to verify that simulation results satisfy these constraints.


Species:

Reactions:


Middle-click: pin/unpin nodes
Shift-click: pool/unpool species
Right-click: context menu

Apply alternate model layout to overlapping elements in current model:

log scales

y-axis min/max

x-axis min/max

Deciphering microbial interactions in synthetic human gut microbiome communities.

  • Ophelia S Venturelli
  • Alex C Carr
  • Garth Fisher
  • Ryan H Hsu
  • Rebecca Lau
  • Benjamin P Bowen
  • Susan Hromada
  • Trent Northen
  • Adam P Arkin
Mol. Syst. Biol. 2018; 14 (6):
Abstract
The ecological forces that govern the assembly and stability of the human gut microbiota remain unresolved. We developed a generalizable model-guided framework to predict higher-dimensional consortia from time-resolved measurements of lower-order assemblages. This method was employed to decipher microbial interactions in a diverse human gut microbiome synthetic community. We show that pairwise interactions are major drivers of multi-species community dynamics, as opposed to higher-order interactions. The inferred ecological network exhibits a high proportion of negative and frequent positive interactions. Ecological drivers and responsive recipient species were discovered in the network. Our model demonstrated that a prevalent positive and negative interaction topology enables robust coexistence by implementing a negative feedback loop that balances disparities in monospecies fitness levels. We show that negative interactions could generate history-dependent responses of initial species proportions that frequently do not originate from bistability. Measurements of extracellular metabolites illuminated the metabolic capabilities of monospecies and potential molecular basis of microbial interactions. In sum, these methods defined the ecological roles of major human-associated intestinal species and illuminated design principles of microbial communities.

No additional notes are available for this model.