| Literature DB >> 21901292 |
Magdalena Klimek-Ochab1, Małgorzata Brzezińska-Rodak, Ewa Zymańczyk-Duda, Barbara Lejczak, Paweł Kafarski.
Abstract
Simple and effective protocols of cell wall disruption were elaborated for tested fungal strains: Penicillium citrinum, Aspergillus fumigatus, Rhodotorula gracilis. Several techniques of cell wall disintegration were studied, including ultrasound disintegration, homogenization in bead mill, application of chemicals of various types, and osmotic shock. The release of proteins from fungal cells and the activity of a cytosolic enzyme, glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase, in the crude extracts were assayed to determine and compare the efficacy of each method. The presented studies allowed adjusting the particular method to a particular strain. The mechanical methods of disintegration appeared to be the most effective for the disintegration of yeast, R. gracilis, and filamentous fungi, A. fumigatus and P. citrinum. Ultrasonication and bead milling led to obtaining fungal cell-free extracts containing high concentrations of soluble proteins and active glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase systems.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21901292 PMCID: PMC3189342 DOI: 10.1007/s12223-011-0069-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Folia Microbiol (Praha) ISSN: 0015-5632 Impact factor: 2.099
Comparison of the effectiveness of the mechanical cell disruption
| Procedure | Assayed values | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||
| Protein concentration (μg/mL) | Specific enzyme activity of G6PDa (U/mg, ×10−3) | Protein concentration (μg/mL) | Specific enzyme activity of G6PDa (U/mg, ×10−3) | Protein concentration (μg/mL) | Specific enzyme activity of G6PDa (U/mg, ×10−3) | |
| Sonication | ||||||
| Total timeb, 1 min (cycle: 11-s sonications, 2-min cooling) | 1,300 ± 187 | 1.90 ± 0.13 | 258 ± 75 | 9.50 ± 1.20 | 3,121 ± 298 | 16.20 ± 1.70 |
| Total timeb, 2 min (cycle: 11-s sonications, 2-min cooling) | 890 ± 108 | 2.90 ± 0.20 | 285 ± 86 | 13.50 ± 0.87 | 5,212 ± 234 | 12.50 ± 3.60 |
| Total timeb, 3.5 min (cycle: 11-s sonications, 2-min cooling) | 975 ± 103 | 2.80 ± 0.24 | 300 ± 54 | 17 ± 0.98 | 5,166 ± 324 | 56.70 ± 2.90 |
| Total timeb, 5 min (cycle: 11-s sonications, 2-min cooling) | 900 ± 115 | 6 ± 0.87 | 278 ± 32 | 15 ± 0.85 | 8,444 ± 356 | 4.90 ± 0.78 |
| Total timeb, 1 min (cycle: 30-s sonications, 2-min cooling) | 320 ± 52 | 5 ± 0.76 | 87 ± 8.50 | 1.10 ± 0.13 | 3,638 ± 167 | 13.30 ± 1.70 |
| Total timeb, 2 min (cycle: 30-s sonications, 2-min cooling) | 220 ± 23 | 10.50 ± 0.89 | 35 ± 4.70 | 2.50 ± 0.17 | 2,950 ± 134 | 14.9 ± 1.50 |
| Total timeb, 3.5 min (cycle: 30-s sonications, 2-min cooling) | 370 ± 89 | 8 ± 0.87 | 41 ± 4.30 | 0.8 ± 0.10 | 4,921 ± 198 | 10.70 ± 1.80 |
| Total timeb, 5 min (cycle: 30-s sonications, 2-min cooling) | 250 ± 32 | 13.300 ± 0.65 | 9 ± 0.80 | 2.0 ± 0.20 | 4,254 ± 223 | 13.80 ± 2.80 |
| Bead mill | ||||||
| Total timec, 3 min (glass beads; cycle: 30-s milling, 2-min cooling) | 127 ± 13 | 15.40 ± 2.30 | 110 ± 12 | 5.50 ± 0.50 | 3,180 ± 98 | 22.30 ± 1.80 |
| Total timec, 3 min (glass beads; cycle: 1-min milling, 2-min cooling) | 90 ± 5 | 13.50 ± 4.50 | 121 ± 3 | 1 ± 0.10 | 3,611 ± 78 | 19.30 ± 2.50 |
| Total timec, 3 min (glass beads, continuous process) | 175 ± 23 | 12.40 ± 1.60 | 129 ± 15 | 1.40 ± 0.30 | 2,919 ± 36 | 20.50 ± 1.89 |
| Total timec, 3 min (zirconium beads; cycle: 30-s milling, 2-min cooling) | 134 ± 14 | 20 ± 1.97 | 141 ± 12 | 1.500 ± 0.25 | 134 ± 12 | 23 ± 1.98 |
| Total timec, 3 min (zirconium beads; cycle: 1-min milling, 2-min cooling) | 144 ± 23 | 18 ± 0.67 | 172 ± 13 | 1.55 ± 0.34 | 144 ± 12 | 23.70 ± 2.80 |
| Total timec, 3 min (zirconium beads, continuous process) | 157 ± 11 | 16.50 ± 0.98 | 140 ± 13 | 1.80 ± 0.24 | 159 ± 16 | 27 ± 1.68 |
Values are shown as the means±SD over three independent replications
aSpecific activity of G6PD measured n the fugal crude extract
bOverall time of exposition on acoustic waves
cOverall time of milling