Addressing the challenges of multiscale model management in systems biology

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2006.10.004Get rights and content

Abstract

Mathematical and computational modelling are emerging as important techniques for studying the behaviour of complex biological systems. We argue that two advances are necessary to properly leverage these techniques: firstly, the ability to integrate models developed and executed on separate tools, without the need for substantial translation and secondly, a comprehensive system for storing and man-ageing not only the models themselves but also the parameters and tools used to execute those models and the results they produce. A framework for modelling with these features is described here. We have developed of a suite of XML-based services used for the storing and analysis of models, model parameters and results, and tools for model integration. We present these here, and evaluate their effectiveness using a worked example based on part of the hepatocyte glycogenolysis system.

Introduction

Modelling physiology is in many ways similar to the modelling of process systems so there is much that chemical engineers can contribute. As with process systems, one of the major challenges in computational physiology is to efficiently integrate existing computational models which describe phenomena associated with a variety of spatial and temporal scales. Such models can be deterministic, stochastic, qualitative, or in many other forms. An important part of this challenge is the storage, collation, and retrieval of models, along with their integration.

Our work (The UCL Beacon Project, 2002–2007) is part of the UK Department of Trade and Industry sponsored Beacon program, focused on harnessing genomics. We aim to build in-silico models that represent aspects of behaviour of the human liver, an epithelial organ. The methodology and modelling system should then be extendable to other epithelial organs. In building a fully integrated model of the liver, existing models of various components must be used along with newly devised models. Our approach is therefore to develop a system for the orchestration and integration of models. Not only will this system permit the development of integrated models which could not otherwise be constructed, it will also support the development of these models in a manner which increases the computational efficiency and reliability of those models, and reduces the time taken for such development.

The framework we have developed supports two key aspects of biological modelling: model integration across different scales, and the interconnection of the distinct components in biological systems. Interconnections are largely based on signalling i.e. the transport and reaction of chemicals between distinct components that drive the physiological system. Using this framework we aim in the project to develop a simulation environment in which a wide variety of models are integrated and exploited within a common domain of interest. These models may be at different levels of abstraction, may deploy different representations, and may focus on different interacting phenomena. Validation may give rise to model variants that will require management.

Our project will result in a system to integrate models addressing phenomena from the level of individual gene and cell features through tissue and organ models. Models at every level of the structure will be integrated, validated, and exploited using a plethora of mathematical, computational and experimental techniques. Fig. 1 shows the hierarchy of levels of signalling activity in many physiological systems.

One of the fundamental issues in model integration is how to handle the intrinsic inter-relationships between different models in an efficient way. Individual models are built up in an isolated biological environment relative to the real physiology and the purpose of linking different models is to recover the physiological conditions in terms of the context the models cover. Our computational framework for linking biological models will take account of the intrinsic couplings existing among the models, while allowing the flexibility that comes from being able to ‘plug’ in different choices of model, and link models which take different approaches to modelling, or which apply to different scales of consideration.

In this paper, we shall review existing work on computational infrastructure for systems biology, argue that two areas of software engineering (information management and encapsulation) should in particular be brought to bear upon the problem and describe a series of software modules we have authored that together constitute a complete computational environment for systems biology. In particular, the system supports the integration of models built in very different software environments while leaving the authoring and execution of the component models within those environments. We provide evidence for the effectiveness of our technique using an example model of part of the response of the liver to adrenaline, where one of the component models is built in Mathematica, and another in X-Phase-Plane-Auto (XPPAUT).

Section snippets

The state of the art

Much current modelling work in biology does not take into account the potential plethora of different models nor how to ‘orchestrate’ them. Integration mechanisms are at the program code level. A good example is the work on the heart carried out by Denis Noble and his team (Noble, 2002). Other groups are also attempting to take a more considered approach to model integration, and we review some related work here.

Metamodelling

In order to understand biological modelling, we have modelled the elements involved in model construction and validation, thus elucidating a biological metamodel. This comprehensive “metamodel” (Finkelstein et al., 2004), underpins the development of the tools presented in this paper so it is reviewed here.

The metamodel representation developed by the project shown in Fig. 2 uses an ‘entity-relationship’ (ER) modelling approach (first presented in Chen (1976)) and presents an entity class (of

Modularity

We construct biological models by connecting together existing smaller models of individual phenomena. This approach has many advantages – if the component models are well understood and have been individually well-tested then much of this confidence should carry over to the larger model. It also has disadvantages – there may be subtle incompatibilities between models which invalidate their integration. Our approach to building software to support model integration has been to try to leverage

The need for information management

Another important and well-established software engineering paradigm has regard to the careful management of the information pertaining to an endevour—the field of information management. At the moment, there is little standard practise in how data is recorded for use in biological modelling. Parameters are collected from the literature and recorded in an ad hoc fashion using notebooks or small-scale computing solutions. The tools used to execute models are installed and configured in many

Integration framework

Fig. 3 shows an overview of our model integration framework, intended to facilitate a modular approach to systems biology modelling, with an emphasis on information management. Note that in Fig. 3, there are only two models. This is a simplified view, appropriate to the example model used later in this paper, see Appendix A.1. A composite model can possess much more complex topology consisting of many models and connectors—our framework has been used to support a seven-element composite model,

Run-time information flow

The user launches the model run manager (1) and points it at a composite model definition file (2). The user also chooses parameters, and the MRM builds from them a parameter run file (3) pointing to values in the parameter database (4). The MRM launches an orchestrator (5), which uses the CMDL file (6), to find (7) metadata files for the individual models, and, from them (8) the model definition files. It then instantiates (9) models and their engines, based on (10) those definition files, and

An example system

The system we have chosen to use to illustrate and test our techniques is based on existing models of hormone-stimulated hepatocyte glycogenolysis. This important physiological process is the means by which energy, in the form of glucose, is released from storage in the liver in humans and other animals. It constitutes one part of the glucose homeostasis system by which blood sugar levels are maintained within acceptable limits. Fig. 6 shows a cartoon of the main features of the pathway that

Conclusions

We have presented a model integration framework for systems biology, with an architecture based on an orchestrator, wrappers, connectors, and information services. We have built many software components which together constitute an implementation of this system. By the development of our two-model example we have demonstrated some of the advantages of our approach, which brings well-established benefits of modern software engineering techniques to systems biology. Our aim is multiscale

Acknowledgement

We gratefully acknowledge the funding of the United Kingdom Department of Trade and Industry (DTI).

References (42)

  • M. Ashburner et al.

    Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology

    Nature Genetics

    (2000)
  • Box, D., Ehnebuske, D., Kakivaya, G., & Layman, A. (2000). Simple object access protocol (SOAP) 1.1. W3C...
  • K. Burrage

    Parallel and sequential methods for ordinary differential equations

    (1995)
  • A. Campbell et al.

    Dynamic information architecture system: An advanced simulation framework for military and civilian applications.

    Society for Computer Simulation International, Simulation Series

    (1998)
  • P. Chen

    The entity-relationship model—Toward a unified view of data

    ACM Transactions on Database Systems

    (1976)
  • Christensen, E., Curbera, F., & Meredith, G. (2001). Web services description language (WSDL)...
  • Ermentrout, B. (2000)....
  • A. Finkelstein et al.

    Computational challenges of systems biology

    IEEE Computer

    (2004)
  • J. Hetherington et al.

    Simplification and its consequences in biological modelling: Conclusions from a study of calcium oscillations in hepatocytes

    Journal of the Royal Society: Interface

    (2005)
  • M. Hucka et al.

    The erato systems biology workbench: Enabling interaction and exchange between software tools for systems biology

    Proceedings Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing

    (2002)
  • M. Hucka et al.

    The systems biology markup language (SBML): A medium for representation and exchange of biochemical models

    Bioinformatics

    (2003)
  • Cited by (19)

    • Towards computer-aided multiscale modelling: A generic supporting environment for model realization and execution

      2012, Computers and Chemical Engineering
      Citation Excerpt :

      A more recent application of CAPE-OPEN standards is reported by Zitney (2010), where an advanced process engineering software tool, termed a “co-simulator”, has been developed which supports the integration of steady-state process simulation with other multiphysics-based equipment simulations (e.g. CFD) in order to get high-fidelity simulation results for designing and analysing energy systems. In some other areas such as biological systems modelling (e.g. Hetherington, Bogle, & Saffrey, 2007; Hunter et al., 2005) and multi-physics modelling (e.g. Smirnov, 2004), there have been similar developments in supporting the combined use of different models and simulation tools. Senin, Wallace, and Borl (2003) developed a distributed object modelling environment (DOME), which supports the integration of different modelling tools involved in various aspects or stages of a (mechanical) engineering design project.

    • Towards computer-aided multiscale modelling: An overarching methodology and support of conceptual modelling

      2012, Computers and Chemical Engineering
      Citation Excerpt :

      The result of CAPE-OPEN has been vital for the improvement of openness in commercial process modelling software, and for the development of open simulation platforms such as CHEOPS (Schopfer, Yang, Wedel, & Marquardt, 2004). In some other areas such as biological systems modelling (e.g. Hetherington, Bogle, & Saffrey, 2007; Hunter et al., 2005) and multi-physics modelling (e.g. Smirnov, 2004), there have been similar developments in supporting the combined use of different models and simulation tools. Starting with the relevant development of CAPM as outlined above, two different sets of challenging issues must be addressed in the process of marching towards CAMM.

    • The role of Computer Aided Process Engineering in physiology and clinical medicine

      2010, Computers and Chemical Engineering
      Citation Excerpt :

      These repositories encourage the use of the standards described above. Another approach has been to develop a system that allows heterogeneous models to be integrated using computational wrappers to enable communication between models within a model management system (Hetherington et al., 2007). This is not unlike the CAPE-OPEN approach well known in the CAPE community (www.colan.org).

    • SAPHIR: A physiome core model of body fluid homeostasis and blood pressure regulation

      2008, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
    • Models and computational strategies linking physiological response to molecular networks from large-scale data

      2008, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text