| Literature DB >> 24957022 |
Daniel Veyel1, Alexander Erban2, Ines Fehrle3, Joachim Kopka4, Michael Schroda5.
Abstract
The generation of efficient production strains is essential for the use of eukaryotic microalgae for biofuel production. Systems biology approaches including metabolite profiling on promising microalgal strains, will provide a better understanding of their metabolic networks, which is crucial for metabolic engineering efforts. Chlamydomonas reinhardtii represents a suited model system for this purpose. We give an overview to genetically amenable microalgal strains with the potential for biofuel production and provide a critical review of currently used protocols for metabolite profiling on Chlamydomonas. We provide our own experimental data to underpin the validity of the conclusions drawn.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24957022 PMCID: PMC4101502 DOI: 10.3390/metabo4020184
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Metabolites ISSN: 2218-1989
Overview of genetically amenable microalgal species.
| Species (group) | Transfection method a | Transgene integration b | Promoters c | Selection marker d | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PB | NHR | [ | |||
| PB | NHR | [ | |||
| EP | NHR | [ | |||
| EP | HR | [ | |||
| PB | HR | [ | |||
| PB | NHR | [ | |||
| PB | NHR | [ | |||
| PB | NH | [ | |||
| PB | NHR | [ |
a PB, particle bombardment; EP, electroporation; PEG, incubation of protoplasts with polyethylene glycol; AB, Agrobacterium-mediated transfection; GB, agitation with glass beads; SCW, agitation with silicon carbide whiskers; b NHR, stable integration via nonhomologous recombination; HR, stable integration via homologous recombination; c LHC, light harvesting complex; NR, nitrate reductase; fcp, fucoxanthin chl a/c-binding protein; VCP, violaxanthin/chlorophyll a binding protein; TUB, tubulin; HSP, heat shock protein; UEP, ubiquitin extension protein; RBCS, Rubisco small subunit; URA, uracil; CaMV, cauliflower mosaic virus; SV, simian virus; CA, carbonic anhydrase; CYC, cytochrome c; d nat, nourseothricin resistance; ble, resistance to phleomycin antibiotics; nptII, kanamycin resistance; sat-1, streptothricin resistance; cat, chloramphenicol resistance; HygR, resistance to hygromycin B; Bsr, resistance to blasticidin S; hpt, hygromycin resistance; bar, resistance to herbicide phosphinothricin; URA3, complementation of ura3 mutant with wild-type URA3 gene; GFP, screening for cells expressing green fluorescent protein; NR, complementation of nitrate reductase mutant with wild-type NR gene; arg7, complementation of argininosuccinate lyase mutant with wild-type ARG7 gene; aphVIII, resistance to paromomycin, kanamycin and neomycin; aph7“, resistance to hygromycin B; aadA, resistance to spectinomycin and streptomycin; modified phytoene desaturase, norflurazon resistance.
Figure 1Typical workflow for metabolic profiling experiments on microorganisms. Harvesting of microbes for metabolite profiling may involve a rapid quenching step. Frozen samples are extracted with organic solvents, optionally including a grinding step. For GC-MS analysis, extracts have to be chemically derivatized to enhance the thermal stability and volatility of the compounds. Most frequently, the first standardization steps involve normalization to labeled internal standard(s) and to a reference value for the analyzed biomass (e.g. culture optical density (OD)) for the comparison of data from different samples. Logarithmic transformation is commonly utilized to achieve a near normal distribution of the data. For further descriptions, see the text.
Comparison of the methods for sampling, extraction and sample workup of GC-MS based metabolite profiling studies in Chlamydomonas.
| Study | Strain used | Harvesting method a | Harvesting conditions b | Harvested cells c | Mechanical cell disruption | Extraction buffer d | Cells/mL extraction buffer | Extract equivalent to cells injected into GC-MS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | CC 125 | Q | 32.5% MW; −25 °C; 4:1 | × | mortar and pestle | MCW 10:3:1 | 1.20 × 106 | × |
| [ | CC 125 | Q | 70% MW; −70 °C; 1:1 | 2.50 × 106 | 5-mm steel ball | MCW 5:2:1 | 1.92 × 106 | 1.68 × 104 |
| [ | CC 503 | Q broth | 100% M; −20 °C; 0.43:1 | × | none | MCW 1:1:0 | × | × |
| [ | Stm6 | C | 3,000 g; 1 min; 4 °C | 3.00 × 107 | none | MCW 1:0:0 | 6.00 × 107 | 1.00 × 107 |
| [ | CC 406 & Stm6Glc4 | C | 3,000 g; 1 min | 3.60 × 108 | homogenizer, 0.1-mm silica beads | MCW 4:0:1 | 3.60 × 108 | 2.52 × 106 |
| [ | cw 92 | Q | 32.5 MW; −25 °C; 4:1 | 1.50 × 106 | none | MCW 3:1:1 | × | × |
| [ | CC 503 | Q broth | 100% M; −20 °C; 1:1 | 6.00 × 106 | none | MCW 5:2:1 | 3.00 × 107 | 5.31 × 104 |
| [ | CC 125 | Q | 70% MW; −80 °C; 3:1 | 2.00 × 106 | sonicator (3 × 30 sec) | MCW 10:3:1 | 2.00 × 106 | 2.00 × 104 |
| [ | CC 125 | Q | 70% MW; −70 °C; 1:1 | 5.00 × 106 | 5-mm steel ball | MCW 5:2:2 | 6.67 × 106 | 8.97 × 104 |
| [ | cw 15 | F | × | 3.50 × 107 | none | MCW 5:2:1 | 1.75 × 107 | 1.75 × 105 |
| [ | CC 503 | × | × | 15–25 mg fresh weight | Retsch mill, quartz sand | MCW 5:2:1 (1% acetic acid) | × | × |
| [ | CC125 | F | 30–45 sec | 2.00 × 107 | mortar and pestle | MCW 0:1:1 | 4.00 × 106 | 1.92 × 105 |
| [ | CC125 | Q | 70% MW; −70 °C; 1:1 | 7.00 × 106 | 5-mm steel ball | MCW 5:2:2 | 9.33 × 106 | 6.53 × 104 |
| This publication (see | CC 1690 | F | 10–20 sec | 1.00 × 107 | none | MCW 7:3:0 | 1.39 × 107 | 1.50 × 105 |
× , no information given in the study. a Q/C/F, quenched/centrifuged/filtered; Q broth, quenched cells including medium. b The parameters used at harvest for a given method. For quenching, the composition of the quenching solution, its temperature and the quenching buffer-to-sample ratio are given; for centrifugation, speed, time and temperature are given; for fast filtration, the filtration time is given. c The lowest sampled amount indicated in the respective study. d M/C/W, methanol/chloroform/water.
Figure 2Principal component (PC) analysis of Chlamydomonas metabolite profiles obtained by different harvesting methods. Four replicates were harvested and processed from the same culture by each harvesting method and measured by GC-MS. The generated metabolite profiles were normalized to the internal standard and log2-transformed before being subjected to principal component analysis. C, centrifuged; F, filtered; Q, quenched; all, cells and medium.
Figure 3The effect of matrix complexity on metabolite profile properties. (a) Total ion count; (b) the response of the internal standard, 13C-sorbitol; and (c) the summed intensities of n-alkanes obtained by analyzing different amounts of cells.
Figure 4The effect of matrix complexity on the linearity of individual metabolite responses. (Left) Heat map of metabolites measured from differently concentrated extracts, the measured extract corresponding to the amount of cells is indicated at the top. (Middle) Heat map of the coefficients of determination (R2) values obtained by linear regression of the metabolite data from (left), including different samples as indicated at the top. Missing data are shown as grey boxes in the heat maps. (Right) The panel shows exemplarily the normalized abundance of four metabolites and the respective regression curves.
Figure 5Ratios of intracellular to extracellular metabolite abundance. Measured metaboliteresponses that have been analyzed in both filtrate samples and cell samples were normalized to the extracted volumes (the total cellular volume was determined with a Coulter Counter), and the ratios of n = 36 samples were plotted as box plots.