| Literature DB >> 24894915 |
Abstract
The lignocellulolytic platform of the wood-decaying organism Dichomitus squalens is important for production of biodegradable elements; however, the system has not yet been fully characterized. In this study, using statistical target optimization, we analysed substrate selectivity based on a variety of D. squalens metabolic pathways using combined omics tools. As compared with the alkali-lignin (AL) programme, the rice straw (RS) programme has the advantage of multilayered signalling to regulate cellulolytic-related genes or to connect their pathways. The spontaneous instability of the AL programme was accelerated by harsh starvation as compared with that of the RS programme. Therefore, the AL programme converged on cellular maintenance much easier and more rapidly. However, regardless of external substrate/concentration type, the compensatory pattern of the major targets (especially peroxidases and growth regulators) was similar, functioning to maintain cellular homeostasis. Interestingly, ligninolytic-mediated targets under non-kaleidoscopic conditions were induced by a substrate-input-control, and especially this mechanism had an important effect on the early stages of the biodegradation process. This optimized target analysis could be used to understand lignocellulolytic network and to improve downstream efficiency.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24894915 PMCID: PMC4229324 DOI: 10.1111/1751-7915.12134
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microb Biotechnol ISSN: 1751-7915 Impact factor: 5.813
Figure 1Downstream profiles in optimized D. squalens grown on lignocellulosic substrates. Hierarchical classification of 50 metabolites showing significant variation in regulation with 0.01 ≤ P < 0.05 and |fold| > 2 in AL group. Expression profiles from culture grown on AL for 7 (early), 15 (optimal) and 30 (final) days. Functional clustering of significant targets was determined as molecular biological functions released by the US Department’s Joint Genome Institute and National Institute of Standards and Technology. The scale reflects the logarithmic unit as compared with the negative control (without external substrates).
Figure 2Open map of D. squalens proteome. The fungus was independently cultured for 15 days (optimal stage) on (B) alkali-lignin. The (A) negative control was grown without external substrates. Seven points on the 2-DE images show core proteins with P < 0.05 and |fold| > 2, i.e. meaning significantly lower (green) or higher (red) regulations compared with the responding proteins in control. The identity of adopted genes encoding proteins of D. squalens was named based on US Department’s Joint Genome Institute.
Figure 3Comparative analysis of target metabolome in D. squalens cultured using alkali-lignin and rice straw as substrates. Metabolomic profiles from cultures grown on AL or RS for 7 (early), 15 (optimal) and 30 (final) days. (A) Overlap in the predominant metabolites between the D. squalens RS and AL groups. (B and C) Analysis of vertical bar plotting and linear regression (R2) between the RS and AL cultures based on the logarithmic intensities of significant 64 metabolites (50 metabolites in AL and 58 metabolites in RS) of D. squalens.
Figure 4Contrastive analysis of significant proteome in D. squalens cultured using alkali-lignin and rice straw. Proteomic profiles from cultures grown on AL or RS for 15 days (optimal stage). In order to interpret the interrelationship between the functional targets, both 2D vertical bar-plot imaging (A) and linear regression (C) were carry out under different substrates (RS versus AL). (B) Overlap in the predominant proteins between the two groups (RS versus AL).
Figure 5Schematic outline of simultaneously spontaneously multitasking platform in D. squalens system. The reactive oxygen species-mediated peroxidation programme is the keystone of D. squalens ligninolysis. The dotted line announces the substrate-specific regulation of D. squalens grown under optimized deconstruction with rice straw as an external substrate. The arrows on the map are designated as purple (upregulated and downregulated), red (upregulated) and green (downregulated) based solely on the polyomics profiles.
List of key proteins that exhibit dominant change of expression during optimized biodegradation under the presence of different materials (RS versus AL)
| JGI ID | Functional classification | Molecular function | Change in expression | |Fold| ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RS: AL | ||||
| 179533 | FC1 and FC2 | Alpha/beta hydrolase fold-3 | Upregulated in both | 2.1 |
| 165178 | FC1 and FC2 | Glycoside hydrolase, family 28 | Upregulated in RS/Downregulated in AL | 8.3 |
| 127252 | FC1 and FC2 | Polysaccharide deacetylase | Upregulated in both | 3.4 |
| 159581 | FC3 and FC4 | Ras GTPase | Downregulated in RS/Upregulated in AL | 0.14 |
| 137219 | Unclassified | Hypothetical protein | Downregulated in RS/Upregulated in AL | 0.16 |
The classification and putative function of the proteins were assigned based on the US Department’s Joint Genome Institute database.
Relative expression of AL and RS compared with that of control (no substrate).
Relative fold change ratio of the targets between AL and RS based on RS level.
List of core metabolites that exhibit predominant change of expression during optimized D. squalens degradation under the presence of different lignocellulosic materials (RS versus AL)
| Target | Functional classification | Stage | Change in expression | |Fold| ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RS: AL | ||||
| Galactitol | FC1 | Optimal | Upregulated in RS/Downregulated in AL | 4.0 |
| Glucitol | FC1 | Optimal | Downregulated in RS/Upregulated in AL | 0.19 |
| Mannitol | FC1 | Optimal | Upregulated in RS/Notexpressed in AL | 4.2 |
| Arabitol | FC1 | Early | Upregulated in RS/Notexpressed in AL | 3.2 |
| Glucose | FC1 | Optimal | Downregulated in RS/Upregulated in AL | 0.29 |
| Glucoson | FC1 | Final | Upregulated in RS/Notexpressed in AL | 3.5 |
| Xylose | FC1 | Optimal | Upregulated in RS/Downregulated in AL | 5.9 |
| Fucose | FC1 | Optimal | Notexpressed in RS/Upregulated in AL | 0.32 |
| Ribose | FC1 | Optimal to Final | Notexpressed in RS/Upregulated in AL | 0.30 to 0.30 |
| Mannonic acids | FC1 | Early | Upregulated in RS/Downregulated in AL | 9.3 |
| Arabinonic acid | FC1 | Optimal | Upregulated in RS/Notexpressed in AL | 3.2 |
| Malonic acid | FC1 | Early to Optimal | Downregulated in RS/Notexpressed in AL | 0.30 to 0.37 |
| Gluconic acid | FC1 | Final | Upregulated in RS/Downregulated in AL | 9.1 |
| Glucosamin | FC1 | Final | Notexpressed in RS/Upregulated in AL | 0.31 |
| Oxalic acid | FC1 | Optimal | Downregulated in RS/Upregulated in AL (Downregulated at Final in both) | 0.13 |
| Proline | FC2 | Early | Upregulated in RS/Downregulated in AL | 4.7 |
| Glutaminic acid | FC2 | Early to Optimal | Upregulated in RS/Downregulated in AL | 7.6 |
| Lysine | FC2 | Optimal to Final | Upregulated in RS/Notexpressed in AL | 4.1 to 4.0 |
| Methionine | FC2 | Final | Upregulated in RS/Notexpressed in AL | 3.0 |
| Aspartic acid | FC2 | Optimal | Downregulated in RS/Upregulated in AL | 0.14 |
| Tyrosine | FC2 | Final | Upregulated in RS/Notexpressed in AL | 3.5 |
| Asparagine | FC2 | Optimal to Final | Notexpressed in RS/Upregulated in AL | 0.30 to 0.32 |
| Arachidonic acid | FC2 | Final | Upregulated in RS/Downregulated in AL | 5.5 |
| Butanoic acid | FC2 | Early to Optimal | Upregulated in RS/Downregulated in AL | 4.8 to 3.4 |
| Pentanoic acid | FC2 | Optimal | Upregulated in RS/Downregulated in AL | 6.0 |
| 2-Hexenedioic acid | FC2 | Optimal | Upregulated in RS/Notexpressed in AL | 3.7 |
| Succinic acid | FC2 | Optimal | Downregulated in RS/Upregulated in AL | 0.17 |
| Lactic acid | FC2 | Final | Upregulated in RS/Notexpressed in AL | 3.1 |
| Glycerol | FC2 | Optimal | Upregulated in RS/Downregulated in AL | 6.7 |
| Threitol | FC2 | Optimal | Upregulated in RS/Notexpressed in AL | 3.2 |
| Ribitol | FC2 | Optimal | Downregulated in RS/Upregulated in AL | 0.24 |
| Fructose | FC2 | Optimal | Upregulated in RS/Downregulated in AL | 3.8 |
| Inositol | FC3 | Early | Notexpressed in RS/Upregulated in AL | 0.30 |
The classification of the targets were assigned based on the released databases from National Institute of Standards and Technology and US Department’s Joint Genome Institute.
Culture period prior to analysis when the significant change was observed.
Relative expression of AL and RS compared with that of control (no substrate).
Relative fold change ratio of the targets between AL and RS based on RS level.
Figure 6Comparative 2D radial-plot imaging of core targets involved in lignocellulolytic mechanism (FC1) based on the culture type of D. squalens grown on substrates for 15 days. These plots indicates a combined display of either substrate type (AL and RS) or concentration type (AL 1.1 g, RS 4.0 g, RS 5.0 g, and RS 6.0 g). These (A) 7 proteins (|fold| > 2 and P < 0.05) and (B) 24 metabolites (0.01 ≤ P < 0.05 and |fold| > 2) were selected with significant variation (based on the logarithmic intensities) as compared with the control (no substrate). Putative functions of the target proteins are shown in Table 2.
Bottom-up results based on the culture-type in D. squalens biodegradation after optimal stage
| Type | Amount (g/L, dry wt. basis) | Change of substrate components (g/L) (before/after) | Monomeric sugar (g/L) | Activity of extracellular enzymes (U/L) | Index of evaluation | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| lignin | glucan | xylan | Glucose | Laccase MnP | GLO | β-glucosidase CDH | Xylanase | glucose (%) | ethanol (%) | ||
| AL | 5.5 g | 5.50/3.30 | – | – | – | ∼200 | ∼350 | – | – | – | – |
| ∼1,200 | < 40 | ||||||||||
| RS | 30.0 g | 5.91/3.56 | 10.70/7.48 | 3.24/2.16 | < 0.24 | ∼250 | ∼380 | ∼140 | ∼200,000 | ∼60 | ∼60 |
| ∼1,100 | < 20 | ∼40 | |||||||||
| RS | 25.0 g | 4.93/2.96 | 8.92/6.20 | 2.70/1.66 | < 0.22 | ∼300 | ∼450 | ∼120 | ∼260,000 | ∼63 | ∼62 |
| ∼1,500 | < 40 | ∼40 | |||||||||
| RS | 20.0 g | 3.94/2.40 | 7.14/5.01 | 2.16/1.42 | < 0.20 | ∼200 | ∼400 | ∼110 | ∼210,000 | ∼58 | ∼60 |
| ∼1,300 | < 30 | ∼30 | |||||||||
soluble glucose from the biodegradable substrates during the SSF.
manganese peroxidase.
glyoxal oxidase.
aryl alcohol oxidase.
cellobiose dehydrogenase.
theoretical maximum yield of glucose from the enzymatic hydrolysis.
theoretical maximum yield of ethanol from the SSF.
Bak et al., 2010.