| Literature DB >> 25852993 |
Leonardo de Figueiredo Vilela1, Verônica Parente Gomes de Araujo1, Raquel de Sousa Paredes1, Elba Pinto da Silva Bon1, Fernando Araripe Gonçalves Torres2, Bianca Cruz Neves1, Elis Cristina Araújo Eleutherio1.
Abstract
We have recently demonstrated that heterologous expression of a bacterial xylose isomerase gene (xylA) of Burkholderia cenocepacia enabled a laboratorial Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain to ferment xylose anaerobically, without xylitol accumulation. However, the recombinant yeast fermented xylose slowly. In this study, an evolutionary engineering strategy was applied to improve xylose fermentation by the xylA-expressing yeast strain, which involved sequential batch cultivation on xylose. The resulting yeast strain co-fermented glucose and xylose rapidly and almost simultaneously, exhibiting improved ethanol production and productivity. It was also observed that when cells were grown in a medium containing higher glucose concentrations before being transferred to fermentation medium, higher rates of xylose consumption and ethanol production were obtained, demonstrating that xylose utilization was not regulated by catabolic repression. Results obtained by qPCR demonstrate that the efficiency in xylose fermentation showed by the evolved strain is associated, to the increase in the expression of genes HXT2 and TAL1, which code for a low-affinity hexose transporter and transaldolase, respectively. The ethanol productivity obtained after the introduction of only one genetic modification and the submission to a one-stage process of evolutionary engineering was equivalent to those of strains submitted to extensive metabolic and evolutionary engineering, providing solid basis for future applications of this strategy in industrial strains.Entities:
Keywords: Ethanol; Evolutionary engineering; Saccharomyces cerevisiae; TAL1; Xylose; Xylose isomerase
Year: 2015 PMID: 25852993 PMCID: PMC4385029 DOI: 10.1186/s13568-015-0102-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AMB Express ISSN: 2191-0855 Impact factor: 3.298
Specific glucose and xylose consumption rates
|
|
| |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.48 ± 0.07 | 0.08 ± 0.04 | 0.47 ± 0.02 | 0.08 ± 0.02 | 0.47 ± 0.02 | 0.06 ± 0.04 | 0.45 ± 0.02 | 0.06 ± 0.03 | 0.41 ± 0.01 | 0.05 ± 0.02 |
|
| 0.73 ± 0.03 | 0.60 ± 0.02 | 0.73 ± 0.07 | 0.59 ± 0.09 | 0.73 ± 0.05 | 0.55 ± 0.03 | 0.73 ± 0.06 | 0.55 ± 0.02 | 0.70 ± 0.09 | 0.49 ± 0.02 |
Initially, both original (un-evolved) and evolved on xylose strains were grown in YNB medium containing different proportions of glucose-xylose until mid-log phase of growth and, then, shifted to the fermentation medium containing 2% glucose and 2% xylose. The aliquots were harvested in time of 24 hours, centrifuged and the supernatants were used to determine the concentration of glucose and xylose, which were used to calculate the rate of sugar consumption. The results represent the mean ± standard deviation of at least three independent experiments.
Figure 1Sugar consumption and ethanol production by Cells of un-evolved (A) and evolved strains (B) were grown in YNB-medium supplemented with 4% glucose until mid-log phase, collected by centrifugation, washed with distilled water and transferred to fermentation medium containing 3% glucose and 1% xylose. The samples were collected in times of 0, 6, 20, 24, 28, 44, 48 hours and the supernatants were used to determine the concentration of glucose and xylose, in times of 24 and 48 hours the supernatants were used to determine the ethanol concentration. The results represent the mean ± standard deviation of at least three independent experiments.
Figure 2Gene expression profiles of genes involved with xylose utilization by The real-time quantitative (qRT-PCR) was used to detect the mRNA expression level of genes involved with xylose catabolism. Gene expression, calculated as fold change compared to the endogenous control gene TAF10, was determined by qRT-PCR in cells harvested at the middle of log-phase of growth. Fold change between un-evolved and evolved strains was evaluated by the 2 – ΔΔCT method. All the results were expressed as the mean ± standard deviation of at least three independent experiments.