Cargando…
Simulated Design–Build–Test–Learn Cycles for Consistent Comparison of Machine Learning Methods in Metabolic Engineering
[Image: see text] Combinatorial pathway optimization is an important tool in metabolic flux optimization. Simultaneous optimization of a large number of pathway genes often leads to combinatorial explosions. Strain optimization is therefore often performed using iterative design–build–test–learn (DB...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Chemical Society
2023
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10510747/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37616156 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.3c00186 |
_version_ | 1785108009383362560 |
---|---|
author | van Lent, Paul Schmitz, Joep Abeel, Thomas |
author_facet | van Lent, Paul Schmitz, Joep Abeel, Thomas |
author_sort | van Lent, Paul |
collection | PubMed |
description | [Image: see text] Combinatorial pathway optimization is an important tool in metabolic flux optimization. Simultaneous optimization of a large number of pathway genes often leads to combinatorial explosions. Strain optimization is therefore often performed using iterative design–build–test–learn (DBTL) cycles. The aim of these cycles is to develop a product strain iteratively, every time incorporating learning from the previous cycle. Machine learning methods provide a potentially powerful tool to learn from data and propose new designs for the next DBTL cycle. However, due to the lack of a framework for consistently testing the performance of machine learning methods over multiple DBTL cycles, evaluating the effectiveness of these methods remains a challenge. In this work, we propose a mechanistic kinetic model-based framework to test and optimize machine learning for iterative combinatorial pathway optimization. Using this framework, we show that gradient boosting and random forest models outperform the other tested methods in the low-data regime. We demonstrate that these methods are robust for training set biases and experimental noise. Finally, we introduce an algorithm for recommending new designs using machine learning model predictions. We show that when the number of strains to be built is limited, starting with a large initial DBTL cycle is favorable over building the same number of strains for every cycle. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10510747 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | American Chemical Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105107472023-09-21 Simulated Design–Build–Test–Learn Cycles for Consistent Comparison of Machine Learning Methods in Metabolic Engineering van Lent, Paul Schmitz, Joep Abeel, Thomas ACS Synth Biol [Image: see text] Combinatorial pathway optimization is an important tool in metabolic flux optimization. Simultaneous optimization of a large number of pathway genes often leads to combinatorial explosions. Strain optimization is therefore often performed using iterative design–build–test–learn (DBTL) cycles. The aim of these cycles is to develop a product strain iteratively, every time incorporating learning from the previous cycle. Machine learning methods provide a potentially powerful tool to learn from data and propose new designs for the next DBTL cycle. However, due to the lack of a framework for consistently testing the performance of machine learning methods over multiple DBTL cycles, evaluating the effectiveness of these methods remains a challenge. In this work, we propose a mechanistic kinetic model-based framework to test and optimize machine learning for iterative combinatorial pathway optimization. Using this framework, we show that gradient boosting and random forest models outperform the other tested methods in the low-data regime. We demonstrate that these methods are robust for training set biases and experimental noise. Finally, we introduce an algorithm for recommending new designs using machine learning model predictions. We show that when the number of strains to be built is limited, starting with a large initial DBTL cycle is favorable over building the same number of strains for every cycle. American Chemical Society 2023-08-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10510747/ /pubmed/37616156 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.3c00186 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Permits the broadest form of re-use including for commercial purposes, provided that author attribution and integrity are maintained (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | van Lent, Paul Schmitz, Joep Abeel, Thomas Simulated Design–Build–Test–Learn Cycles for Consistent Comparison of Machine Learning Methods in Metabolic Engineering |
title | Simulated Design–Build–Test–Learn
Cycles for Consistent Comparison of Machine Learning Methods in Metabolic
Engineering |
title_full | Simulated Design–Build–Test–Learn
Cycles for Consistent Comparison of Machine Learning Methods in Metabolic
Engineering |
title_fullStr | Simulated Design–Build–Test–Learn
Cycles for Consistent Comparison of Machine Learning Methods in Metabolic
Engineering |
title_full_unstemmed | Simulated Design–Build–Test–Learn
Cycles for Consistent Comparison of Machine Learning Methods in Metabolic
Engineering |
title_short | Simulated Design–Build–Test–Learn
Cycles for Consistent Comparison of Machine Learning Methods in Metabolic
Engineering |
title_sort | simulated design–build–test–learn
cycles for consistent comparison of machine learning methods in metabolic
engineering |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10510747/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37616156 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.3c00186 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vanlentpaul simulateddesignbuildtestlearncyclesforconsistentcomparisonofmachinelearningmethodsinmetabolicengineering AT schmitzjoep simulateddesignbuildtestlearncyclesforconsistentcomparisonofmachinelearningmethodsinmetabolicengineering AT abeelthomas simulateddesignbuildtestlearncyclesforconsistentcomparisonofmachinelearningmethodsinmetabolicengineering |