The estimation of demographic parameters from population genetic data has been the subject of many scientific studies [1]. Among these efforts, legofit was firstly proposed in 2019 as a tool to infer size changes, subdivision and gene flow events from patterns of nucleotidic variation [2]. The first release of legofit used a stochastic algorithm to fit population parameters to the observed data. As it requires simulations to evaluate the fitting of each model, it is computationally intensive and can only be deployed on high-performance computing clusters.

To overcome this issue, Rogers proposes a new implementation of legofit based on a deterministic algorithm that allows the estimation of demographic histories to be computationally faster and more accurate [3]. The new algorithm employs a continuous-time Markov chain that traces the ancestry of each sample into the past. The calculations are now divided into two steps, the first one being solved numerically. To test the hypothesis that the new implementation of legofit produces a more desirable performance, Rogers generated extensive simulations of genomes from African, European, Neanderthal and Denisovan populations with msprime [4]. Additionally, legofit was tested on real genetic data from samples of said populations, following a previously published study [5].

Based on simulations, the new deterministic algorithm is more than 1600 times faster than the previous stochastic model. Notably, the new version of legofit produces smaller residual errors, although the overall accuracy to estimate population parameters is comparable to the one obtained using the stochastic algorithm. When applied to real data, the new implementation of legofit was able to recapitulate previous findings of a complex demographic model with early gene flow from humans to Neanderthal [5]. Notably, the new implementation generates better discrimination between models, therefore leading to a better precision at predicting the population history. Some parameters estimated from real data point towards unrealistic scenarios, suggesting that the initial model could be misspecified.

Further research is needed to fully explore the parameter range that can be evaluated by legofit, and to clarify the source of any associated bias. Additionally, the inclusion of data uncertainty in parameter estimation and model selection may be required to apply legofit to low-coverage high-throughput sequencing data [6]. Nevertheless, legofit is an efficient, accessible and user-friendly software to infer demographic parameters from genetic data and can be widely applied to test hypotheses in evolutionary biology. The new implementation of legofit software is freely available at https://github.com/alanrogers/legofit. 

References

[1] Spence JP, Steinrücken M, Terhorst J, Song YS (2018) Inference of population history using coalescent HMMs: review and outlook. Current Opinion in Genetics & Development, 53, 70–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gde.2018.07.002

[2] Rogers AR (2019) Legofit: estimating population history from genetic data. BMC Bioinformatics, 20, 526. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-019-3154-1

[3] Rogers AR (2021) An Efficient Algorithm for Estimating Population History from Genetic Data. bioRxiv, 2021.01.23.427922, ver. 5 peer-reviewed and recommended by Peer community in Mathematical and Computational Biology. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.23.427922

[4] Kelleher J, Etheridge AM, McVean G (2016) Efficient Coalescent Simulation and Genealogical Analysis for Large Sample Sizes. PLOS Computational Biology, 12, e1004842. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004842

[5] Rogers AR, Harris NS, Achenbach AA (2020) Neanderthal-Denisovan ancestors interbred with a distantly related hominin. Science Advances, 6, eaay5483. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aay5483

[6] Soraggi S, Wiuf C, Albrechtsen A (2018) Powerful Inference with the D-Statistic on Low-Coverage Whole-Genome Data. G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics, 8, 551–566. https://doi.org/10.1534/g3.117.300192

Unlike a species tree, a gene tree results not only from speciation events, but also from events acting at the gene level, such as duplications and losses of gene copies, and gene transfer events [1]. The reconciliation of phylogenetic trees consists in embedding a given gene tree into a known species tree and, doing so, determining the location of these gene-level events on the gene tree [2]. Reconciled gene trees can be seen as phylogenetic trees where internal node labels are used to discriminate between different gene-level events. Comparing them is of foremost importance in order to assess the performance of various reconciliation methods (e.g. [3]).
A paper describing an extension of the widely used Robinson-Foulds (RF) distance [4] to trees with labeled internal nodes was presented earlier this year [5]. This distance, called ELRF, is based on edge edits and coincides with the RF distance when all internal labels are identical; unfortunately, the ELRF distance is very costly to compute. In the present paper [6], the authors introduce a distance called LRF, which is inspired by the TED (Tree Edit Distance [7]) and is based on node edits. As the ELRF, the new distance coincides with the RF distance for identically-labeled internal nodes, but has the additional desirable features of being computable in linear time. Also, in the ELRF distance, an edge can be deleted if only it connects nodes with the same label. The new formulation does not have this restriction, and this is, in my opinion, an improvement since the restriction makes little sense in the comparison of reconciled gene trees.
The authors show the pertinence of this new distance by studying the impact of taxon sampling on reconciled gene trees when internal labels are computed via a method based on species overlap. The linear algorithm to compute the LRF distance presented in the paper has been implemented and the software —written in Python— is freely available for the community to use it. I bet that the LRF distance will be widely used in the coming years!

References

[1] Maddison, W. P. (1997). Gene trees in species trees. Systematic biology, 46(3), 523-536. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/46.3.523
[2] Boussau, B., and Scornavacca, C. (2020). Reconciling gene trees with species trees. Phylogenetics in the Genomic Era, p. 3.2:1–3.2:23. [3] Doyon, J. P., Chauve, C., and Hamel, S. (2009). Space of gene/species trees reconciliations and parsimonious models. Journal of Computational Biology, 16(10), 1399-1418. doi: https://doi.org/10.1089/cmb.2009.0095
[4] Robinson, D. F., and Foulds, L. R. (1981). Comparison of phylogenetic trees. Mathematical biosciences, 53(1-2), 131-147. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5564(81)90043-2
[5] Briand, B., Dessimoz, C., El-Mabrouk, N., Lafond, M. and Lobinska, G. (2020). A generalized Robinson-Foulds distance for labeled trees. BMC Genomics 21, 779. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-020-07011-0
[6] Briand, S., Dessimoz, C., El-Mabrouk, N. and Nevers, Y. (2020) A linear time solution to the labeled Robinson-Foulds distance problem. bioRxiv, 2020.09.14.293522, ver. 4 peer-reviewed and recommended by PCI Mathematical and Computational Biology. doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.09.14.293522
[7] Zhang, K., and Shasha, D. (1989). Simple fast algorithms for the editing distance between trees and related problems. SIAM journal on computing, 18(6), 1245-1262. doi: https://doi.org/10.1137/0218082

Reprogramming of cellular networks is a well known challenge in computational biology consisting first of all in properly representing an ensemble of networks having a role in a phenomenon of interest, and secondly in designing strategies to alter the functioning of this ensemble in the desired direction.  Important applications involve disease study: a therapy can be seen as a reprogramming strategy, and the disease itself can be considered a result of a series of adversarial reprogramming actions.  The origins of this domain go back to the seminal paper by Barabási et al. [1] which formalized the concept of network medicine.

An abstract tool which has gathered considerable success in network medicine and network biology are Boolean networks: sets of Boolean variables, each equipped with a Boolean update function describing how to compute the next value of the variable from the values of the other variables.  Despite apparent dissimilarity with the biological systems which involve varying quantities and continuous processes, Boolean networks have been very effective in representing biological networks whose entities are typically seen as being on or off.  Particular examples are protein signalling networks as well as gene regulatory networks.

The paper [2] by Loïc Paulevé presents a versatile tool for tackling reprogramming of Boolean networks seen as models of biological networks.  The problem of reprogramming is often formulated as the problem of finding a set of perturbations which guarantee some properties on the attractors.  The work [2] relies on the most permissive semantics [3], which together with the modelling assumption allows for considerable speed-up in the practically relevant subclass of locally-monotone Boolean networks.

The paper is structured as a tutorial.  It starts by introducing the formalism, defining 4 different general variants of reprogramming under the most permissive semantics, and presenting evaluations of their complexity in terms of the polynomial hierarchy.  The author then describes the software tool BoNesis which can handle different problems related to Boolean networks, and in particular the 4 reprogramming variants.  The presentation includes concrete code examples with their output, which should be very helpful for future users.

The paper [2] introduces a novel scenario: reprogramming of ensembles of Boolean networks delineated by some properties, including for example the property of having a given interaction graph.  Ensemble reprogramming looks particularly promising in situations in which the biological knowledge is insufficient to fully determine all the update functions, i.e. in the majority of modelling situations.  Finally, the author also shows how BoNesis can be used to deal with sequential reprogramming, which is another promising direction in computational controllability, potentially enabling more efficient therapies [4,5].

1. Barabási A-L, Gulbahce N, Loscalzo J (2011) Network medicine: a network-based approach to human disease. Nature Reviews Genetics, 12, 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2918
2. Paulevé L (2023) Marker and source-marker reprogramming of Most Permissive Boolean networks and ensembles with BoNesis. arXiv, ver. 2 peer-reviewed and recommended by Peer Community in Mathematical and Computational Biology. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2207.13307
3. Paulevé L, Kolčák J, Chatain T, Haar S (2020) Reconciling qualitative, abstract, and scalable modeling of biological networks. Nature Communications, 11, 4256. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18112-5
4. Mandon H, Su C, Pang J, Paul S, Haar S, Paulevé L (2019) Algorithms for the Sequential Reprogramming of Boolean Networks. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, 16, 1610–1619. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCBB.2019.2914383
5. Pardo J, Ivanov S, Delaplace F (2021) Sequential reprogramming of biological network fate. Theoretical Computer Science, 872, 97–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2021.03.013

Metabolism is the driving force of life and thereby plays a key role in understanding microbial functioning in monoculture and in ecosystems, from natural habitats to biotechnological applications, from microbiomes related to human health to food production. However, the complexity of metabolic networks poses a major challenge for understanding how they are shaped by evolution and how we can manipulate them. Therefore, many network-based methods have been developed to study metabolism.
With the vast increase of genomic data, genome-scale metabolic networks have become popular use. For these stoichiometric models, metabolic enzymes are predicted using genome data and subsequently algorithms are used to add reactions to construct a complete (biomass producing) metabolic network (e.g., Henry et al., 2010; Machado et al., 2018; see for an overview Mendoza et al., 2019). Many tools are being developed to make predictions with these models, usually variations of FBA (Orth et al., 2010), but also methods for community predictions (Scott Jr et al., 2023) and simulations in time and space (Bauer et al., 2017; Dukovski et al., 2021). The vast amount of sequencing data combined with the high-throughput possibilities of this method make it appealing, but there is a drawback: Namely that the automated construction of networks lacks accuracy and often curation is necessary before these models produce realistic and useful results. This is exemplified by recent studies of microbial metabolism that are better predicted by genome content only than by actual metabolic models (Gralka et al., 2023; Li et al., 2023).

On the other end are well-curated small-scale models of metabolic pathways. For those, knowledge of the enzymes of a pathway, their kinetic properties and (optionally) regulation by metabolites is incorporated in usually a differential equation model. Standard methods for systems of differential equations can be used to study steady-states and the dynamics of these models, which can lead to accurate predictions (Flamholz et al., 2013; van Heerden et al., 2014). However, the downside is that the methods are difficult to scale up and, for many enzymes, the detailed information necessary for these models is not available. Combined with computational challenges, these models are limited to specific pathways and cannot be used for whole cells, nor even communities. Therefore, there is still a need for both methods and models to make accurate predictions on a scale beyond single pathways.

Corrao et al. (2025) aim for an intermediate size model that is both accurate and predictive, does not need an extensive set of enzyme parameters, but also encompasses most of the cell’s metabolic pathways. As they phrase it: a model in the ‘Goldilocks’ zone. Curation can improve genome-scale models substantially but requires additional experimental data. However, as the authors show, even the well-curated model of Escherichia coli can sometimes show unrealistic metabolic flux patterns. A smaller model can be better curated and therefore more predictive, and more methods can be applied, as for example EFM based approaches. The authors show an extensive set of methodologies that can be applied to this model and yield interpretable results. Additionally, the model contains a wealth of standardized annotation that could set a standard for the field.

This is a first model of its kind, and it is not surprising that E. coli is used as its metabolism is very well-studied. However, this could set the basis for similar models for other well-studied organisms. Because the model is well-annotated and characterized, it is very suitable for testing new methods that make predictions with such an intermediate-sized model and that can later be extended for larger models. In the future, such models for different species could aid the creation of methods for studying and predicting metabolism in communities, for which there is a large need for applications (e.g. bioremediation and human health).

The different layers of annotation and the available code with clear documentation make this model an ideal resource as teaching material as well. Methods can be explained on this model, which can still be visualized and interpreted because of its reduced size, while it is large enough to show the differences between methods.

Although it might be too much to expect models of this type for all species, the different layers of annotation can be used to inspire better annotation of genome-scale models and enhance their accuracy and predictability. Thus, this paper sets a standard that could benefit research on metabolic pathways from individual strains to natural communities to communities for biotechnology, bioremediation and human health.

References

Bauer, E., Zimmermann, J., Baldini, F., Thiele, I., Kaleta, C., 2017. BacArena: Individual-based metabolic modeling of heterogeneous microbes in complex communities. PLOS Comput. Biol. 13, e1005544. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005544

Corrao, M., He, H., Liebermeister, W., Noor, E., Bar-Even, A., 2025. A compact model of Escherichia coli core and biosynthetic metabolism. arXiv, ver.4, peer-reviewed and recommended by PCI Mathematical and Computational Biology. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2406.16596

Dukovski, I., Bajić, D., Chacón, J.M., Quintin, M., Vila, J.C.C., Sulheim, S., Pacheco, A.R., Bernstein, D.B., Riehl, W.J., Korolev, K.S., Sanchez, A., Harcombe, W.R., Segrè, D., 2021. A metabolic modeling platform for the computation of microbial ecosystems in time and space (COMETS). Nat. Protoc. 16, 5030–5082. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-021-00593-3

Flamholz, A., Noor, E., Bar-Even, A., Liebermeister, W., Milo, R., 2013. Glycolytic strategy as a tradeoff between energy yield and protein cost. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 110, 10039–10044. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1215283110

Gralka, M., Pollak, S., Cordero, O.X., 2023. Genome content predicts the carbon catabolic preferences of heterotrophic bacteria. Nat. Microbiol. 8, 1799–1808. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41564-023-01458-z

Henry, C.S., DeJongh, M., Best, A.A., Frybarger, P.M., Linsay, B., Stevens, R.L., 2010. High-throughput generation, optimization and analysis of genome-scale metabolic models. Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 977–982. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1672

Li, Z., Selim, A., Kuehn, S., 2023. Statistical prediction of microbial metabolic traits from genomes. PLOS Comput. Biol. 19, e1011705. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011705

Machado, D., Andrejev, S., Tramontano, M., Patil, K.R., 2018. Fast automated reconstruction of genome-scale metabolic models for microbial species and communities. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, 7542–7553. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gky537

Mendoza, S.N., Olivier, B.G., Molenaar, D., Teusink, B., 2019. A systematic assessment of current genome-scale metabolic reconstruction tools. Genome Biol. 20, 158. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-019-1769-1

Orth, J.D., Thiele, I., Palsson, B.Ø., 2010. What is flux balance analysis? Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 245–248. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1614

Scott Jr, W.T., Benito-Vaquerizo, S., Zimmermann, J., Bajić, D., Heinken, A., Suarez-Diez, M., Schaap, P.J., 2023. A structured evaluation of genome-scale constraint-based modeling tools for microbial consortia. PLOS Comput. Biol. 19, e1011363. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011363

van Heerden, J.H., Wortel, M.T., Bruggeman, F.J., Heijnen, J.J., Bollen, Y.J.M., Planqué, R., Hulshof, J., O’Toole, T.G., Wahl, S.A., Teusink, B., 2014. Lost in Transition: Start-Up of Glycolysis Yields Subpopulations of Nongrowing Cells. Science 343, 1245114. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1245114

DNA supercoiling, the under or overwinding of DNA, is known to strongly impact gene expression, as changes in levels of supercoiling directly influence transcription rates. In turn, gene transcription generates DNA supercoiling on each side of an advancing RNA polymerase. This coupling between DNA supercoiling and transcription may result in different outcomes, depending on neighboring gene orientations: divergent genes tend to increase transcription levels, convergent genes tend to inhibit each other, while tandem genes may exhibit more intricate relationships.

While several works have investigated the relationship between transcription and supercoiling, Grohens et al [1] address a different question: how does transcription-supercoiling coupling drive genome evolution? To this end, they consider a simple model of gene expression regulation where transcription level only depends on the local DNA supercoiling and where the transcription of one gene generates a linear profile of positive and negative DNA supercoiling on each side of it. They then make genomes evolve through genomic inversions only considering a fitness that reflects the ability of a genome to cope with two distinct environments for which different genes have to be activated or repressed.

Using this simple model, the authors illustrate how evolutionary adaptation via genomic inversions can adjust expression levels for enhanced fitness within specific environments, particularly with the emergence of relaxation-activated genes. Investigating the genomic organization of individual genomes revealed that genes are locally organized to leverage the transcription-supercoiling coupling for activation or inhibition, but larger-scale networks of genes are required to strongly inhibit genes (sometimes up to networks of 20 genes). Thus, supercoiling-mediated interactions between genes can implicate more than just local genes. Finally, they construct an "effective interaction graph" between genes by successively simulating gene knock-outs for all of the genes of an individual and observing the effect on the expression level of other genes. They observe a densely connected interaction network, implying that supercoiling-based regulation could evolve concurrently with genome organization in bacterial genomes.

References

[1] Théotime Grohens, Sam Meyer, Guillaume Beslon (2024) Emergence of Supercoiling-Mediated Regulatory Networks through the Evolution of Bacterial Chromosome Organization. bioRxiv, ver. 4 peer-reviewed and recommended by Peer Community in Mathematical and Computational Biology  https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.09.23.509185