Literature DB >> 10191391

Metabolic engineering of bacteria for ethanol production

.   

Abstract

Technologies are available which will allow the conversion of lignocellulose into fuel ethanol using genetically engineered bacteria. Assembling these into a cost-effective process remains a challenge. Our work has focused primarily on the genetic engineering of enteric bacteria using a portable ethanol production pathway. Genes encoding Zymomonas mobilis pyruvate decarboxylase and alcohol dehydrogenase have been integrated into the chromosome of Escherichia coli B to produce strain KO11 for the fermentation of hemicellulose-derived syrups. This organism can efficiently ferment all hexose and pentose sugars present in the polymers of hemicellulose. Klebsiella oxytoca M5A1 has been genetically engineered in a similar manner to produce strain P2 for ethanol production from cellulose. This organism has the native ability to ferment cellobiose and cellotriose, eliminating the need for one class of cellulase enzymes. The optimal pH for cellulose fermentation with this organism (pH 5.0-5.5) is near that of fungal cellulases. The general approach for the genetic engineering of new biocatalysts has been most successful with enteric bacteria thus far. However, this approach may also prove useful with Gram-positive bacteria which have other important traits for lignocellulose conversion. Many opportunities remain for further improvements in the biomass to ethanol processes. These include the development of enzyme-based systems which eliminate the need for dilute acid hydrolysis or other pretreatments, improvements in existing pretreatments for enzymatic hydrolysis, process improvements to increase the effective use of cellulase and hemicellulase enzymes, improvements in rates of ethanol production, decreased nutrient costs, increases in ethanol concentrations achieved in biomass beers, increased resistance of the biocatalysts to lignocellulosic-derived toxins, etc. To be useful, each of these improvements must result in a decrease in the cost for ethanol production. Copyright 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Entities:  

Year:  1998        PMID: 10191391     DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0290(19980420)58:2/3<204::aid-bit13>3.0.co;2-c

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biotechnol Bioeng        ISSN: 0006-3592            Impact factor:   4.530


  25 in total

Review 1.  Microbial cellulose utilization: fundamentals and biotechnology.

Authors:  Lee R Lynd; Paul J Weimer; Willem H van Zyl; Isak S Pretorius
Journal:  Microbiol Mol Biol Rev       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 11.056

2.  Isolation and characterization of Shigella flexneri G3, capable of effective cellulosic saccharification under mesophilic conditions.

Authors:  Aijie Wang; Lingfang Gao; Nanqi Ren; Jifei Xu; Chong Liu; Guangli Cao; Hao Yu; Wenzong Liu; Christopher L Hemme; Zhili He; Jizhong Zhou
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2010-11-19       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 3.  Engineering metabolic systems for production of advanced fuels.

Authors:  Yajun Yan; James C Liao
Journal:  J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2009-02-07       Impact factor: 3.346

Review 4.  Engineering for biofuels: exploiting innate microbial capacity or importing biosynthetic potential?

Authors:  Hal Alper; Gregory Stephanopoulos
Journal:  Nat Rev Microbiol       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 60.633

5.  Multigene editing in the Escherichia coli genome via the CRISPR-Cas9 system.

Authors:  Yu Jiang; Biao Chen; Chunlan Duan; Bingbing Sun; Junjie Yang; Sheng Yang
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2015-01-30       Impact factor: 4.792

6.  Bacterial consortia constructed for the decomposition of Agave biomass.

Authors:  Miranda Maki; Svetlana Iskhakova; Tingzhou Zhang; Wensheng Qin
Journal:  Bioengineered       Date:  2014-03-05       Impact factor: 3.269

Review 7.  Metabolic engineering for production of biorenewable fuels and chemicals: contributions of synthetic biology.

Authors:  Laura R Jarboe; Xueli Zhang; Xuan Wang; Jonathan C Moore; K T Shanmugam; Lonnie O Ingram
Journal:  J Biomed Biotechnol       Date:  2010-04-06

8.  Comparing the fermentation performance of Escherichia coli KO11, Saccharomyces cerevisiae 424A(LNH-ST) and Zymomonas mobilis AX101 for cellulosic ethanol production.

Authors:  Ming W Lau; Christa Gunawan; Venkatesh Balan; Bruce E Dale
Journal:  Biotechnol Biofuels       Date:  2010-05-27       Impact factor: 6.040

9.  Deletion of methylglyoxal synthase gene (mgsA) increased sugar co-metabolism in ethanol-producing Escherichia coli.

Authors:  L P Yomano; S W York; K T Shanmugam; L O Ingram
Journal:  Biotechnol Lett       Date:  2009-05-21       Impact factor: 2.461

Review 10.  The path to next generation biofuels: successes and challenges in the era of synthetic biology.

Authors:  Clementina Dellomonaco; Fabio Fava; Ramon Gonzalez
Journal:  Microb Cell Fact       Date:  2010-01-20       Impact factor: 5.328

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.