A Simple Comparison of Biochemical Systems Theory and Metabolic Control Analysis

TL;DR

This paper compares Biochemical Systems Theory and Metabolic Control Analysis, showing their fundamental equivalence in analyzing biochemical networks and demonstrating their interchangeable concepts through a simple linear chain example.

Contribution

It provides a clear comparison and demonstrates the equivalence of BST and MCA in steady-state analysis of biochemical pathways.

Findings

BST and MCA produce identical results in steady-state analysis

Concepts like elasticities and logarithmic gains are interchangeable between frameworks

Both frameworks are fundamentally equivalent in analyzing biochemical systems

Abstract

This paper explores some basic concepts of Biochemical Systems Theory (BST) and Metabolic Control Analysis (MCA), two frameworks developed to understand the behavior of biochemical networks. Initially introduced by Savageau, BST focuses on system stability and employs power laws in modeling biochemical systems. On the other hand, MCA, pioneered by authors such as Kacser and Burns and Heinrich and Rapoport, emphasizes linearization of the governing equations and describes relationships (known as theorems) between different measures. Despite apparent differences, both frameworks are shown to be equivalent in many respects. Through a simple example of a linear chain, the paper demonstrates how BST and MCA yield identical results when analyzing steady-state behavior and logarithmic gains within biochemical pathways. This comparative analysis highlights the interchangeability of concepts such as kinetic orders, elasticities and other logarithmic gains.