Abstract
Genome-scale metabolic models (GEMs) of microbial communities offer valuable insights into the functional capabilities of their members and facilitate the exploration of microbial interactions. These models are generated using different automated reconstruction tools, each relying on different biochemical databases that may affect the conclusions drawn from the in silico analysis. One way to address this problem is to employ a consensus reconstruction method that combines the outcomes of different reconstruction tools. Here, we conducted a comparative analysis of community models reconstructed from three automated tools, i.e. CarveMe, gapseq, and KBase, alongside a consensus approach, utilizing metagenomics data from two marine bacterial communities. Our analysis revealed that these reconstruction approaches, while based on the same genomes, resulted in GEMs with varying numbers of genes and reactions as well as metabolic functionalities, attributed to the different databases employed. Further, our results indicated that the set of exchanged metabolites was more influenced by the reconstruction approach rather than the specific bacterial community investigated. This observation suggests a potential bias in predicting metabolite interactions using community GEMs. We also showed that consensus models encompassed a larger number of reactions and metabolites while concurrently reducing the presence of dead-end metabolites. Therefore, the usage of consensus models allows making full and unbiased use from aggregating genes from the different reconstructions in assessing the functional potential of microbial communities.