Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

More Reversible Pyrophosphate Reactions That Should Be Irreversible #648

Closed
Devlin-Moyer opened this issue Jun 20, 2023 · 1 comment
Closed
Labels

Comments

@Devlin-Moyer
Copy link
Collaborator

Follow-up on #527: I recently reran the same bit of Python code I used to identify all the reactions mentioned in #527 (and fixed in #557) on the latest version of Human-GEM, and it came up with a few more reactions:

ID Reaction Proposed Change
MAR02786 ATP + CoA + linoleate <=> AMP + linoleoyl-CoA + PPi set lower bound to 0
MAR02802 ATP + CoA + linoleate <=> AMP + linoleoyl-CoA + PPi set lower bound to 0
MAR03388 ATP + CoA + phytanic acid <=> AMP + PPi + 3(S)-Phytanoyl Coenzyme A set lower bound to 0
MAR03390 ATP + CoA + pristanic acid <=> (2R)-pristanoyl-CoA + AMP + PPi set lower bound to 0
MAR09508 (5)ppPur-mRNA + GTP <=> G(5)pppR-RNA + PPi set lower bound to 0
MAR01845 AMP + glycolithocholate + H+ + PPi <=> ATP + glycine + lithocholate swap products & reactants, then set lower bound to 0
MAR09523 PPi + tRNA containing 6-isopentenyladenosine <=> dimethylallyl-PP + tRNA swap products & reactants, then set lower bound to 0
MAR09546 AMP + PPi + RNA-terminal-2,3-cyclic-phosphate <=> ATP + RNA-3-terminal-phosphate swap products & reactants, then set lower bound to 0

See #527 for a more thorough explanation, but all of these reactions should be irreversible in the direction that consumes PPi due to the ubiquitous abundant expression of highly-active pyrophosphatases. I have no idea why they weren't caught the first time (none of these reactions appear to have been edited or created since #557 was merged), but these should all be made irreversible for all the same reasons mentioned in #527.

I've already opened #641 to implement the proposed changes

@feiranl
Copy link
Collaborator

feiranl commented Jul 13, 2023

Fixed in #641

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants