TABLE 1.
Simulation results of 16 terminal electron acceptors by three GEMs.
| Metabolites | iSO783 | iMR1_799 | iLJ1162 | ATPM of iLJ1162 (mmol/gDW/h) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fumarate | + | + | + | 11.165 | Maier et al. (2003) |
| Nitrate | + | + | + | 5.329 | Gao et al. (2009) |
| Nitrite | + | + | + | 5.583 | Gao et al. (2009) |
| DMSO | + | + | + | 11.165 | Gralnick et al. (2006) |
| TMAO | - | + | + | 15.225 | Dos Santos et al. (1998) |
| Thiosulfate | + | + | + | 16.24 | Shirodkar et al. (2011) |
| Sulfite | + | + | + | 11.165 | Shirodkar et al. (2011) |
| Fe3+ | + | + | + | 16.24 | Coursolle and Gralnick, (2010) |
| MnO2 | − | − | + | 11.165 | Bretschger et al. (2007) |
| CrO4 2− | − | − | + | 11.165 | Gao et al. (2010) |
| UO2 | + | + | + | 16.24 | Marshall et al. (2006) |
| AsO4 − | − | − | + | 4.06 | Wang et al. (2016) |
| Pd2+ | − | − | + | 16.24 | Yang et al. (2020) |
| V5+ | − | − | + | 16.24 | Myers et al. (2004) |
| Co3+ | + | + | + | 16.24 | Hau et al. (2008) |
| Cu2+ | − | − | + | 16.24 | Shen et al. (2017) |
The ‘+’ and ‘−’ symbols indicate that ATPM, flux was obtained or not in silico, respectively.