| Literature DB >> 29669516 |
Katherine M Lupino1,2, Kymberleigh A Romano3,4, Matthew J Simons5, John T Gregg6,2, Leanna Panepinto7,4, Ghislaine M Cruz8,2, Lauren Grajek9,2, Gregory A Caputo2,10, Mark J Hickman10, Gregory B Hecht11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An issue associated with efficient bioethanol production is the fact that the desired product is toxic to the biocatalyst. Among other effects, ethanol has previously been found to influence the membrane of E. coli in a dose-dependent manner and induce changes in the lipid composition of the plasma membrane. We describe here the characterization of a collection of ethanol-tolerant strains derived from the ethanologenic Escherichia coli strain FBR5.Entities:
Keywords: Escherichia coli; Ethanol tolerance; FBR5; Membrane permeability; Next-generation sequencing; fecA
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29669516 PMCID: PMC5907409 DOI: 10.1186/s12866-018-1180-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Microbiol ISSN: 1471-2180 Impact factor: 3.605
E. coli strains and plasmids used in this study
| Strain or plasmid | Genotype or relevant characteristicsa | Source or reference |
|---|---|---|
| BW25113 | MG1655 derivative; F−, | [ |
| BW25113 Δ JW4251 | BW25113 | [ |
| FBR5 | ∆ | [ |
| MG1655 | F−, | K-12 reference strain; ATCC47076 |
| Plasmids | ||
| pCA24N | Cmr vector, IPTG-inducible promoter | [ |
| pCA24N + JW4251 | pCA24N derivative carrying | [ |
| pLOI297 | Apr Tcr
| [ |
aAbbreviations: Ap ampicillin, Cm chloramphenicol, Kan kanamycin, Tc tetracycline
Fig. 1Survival curve data demonstrating that E. coli FBR5 has lower ethanol tolerance than its MG1655 ancestor. E. coli strains MG1655 and FBR5 were grown for 120 min in LB containing 16.5% (v/v) ethanol, and viable cell counts were conducted at specific time points during that incubation period. Each of the data points are the average of three to five independent trials. The error bars represent the Standard Error of the Mean (SEM)
Fig. 2MIC experiments were conducted using serial dilutions to demonstrate acquired ethanol tolerance. Mutants were considered to have a high MIC if they were capable of showing growth above an OD of 0.1 at 600 nm at 4.5% EtOH. Strains unable to grown to above an OD of 0.1 at 600 nm at 4.5% EtOH were determined to have a low MIC. All strains, FBR5 and the 20 isolated mutants, grew to an OD under 0.1 in 9% EtOH and to an OD of ≥0.1 in 2.25% EtOH (results not shown). Data shown represents the results from at least three independent trials. The error bars represent one standard deviation above and below the mean of the data. Mutant strains are presented in the order of their MIC phenotypes and 30 °C ONPG permeability (see also Fig. 3 and Table 3). Blue columns represent data from strains categorized as “High MIC” strains and red columns represent data from strains categorized as “Low MIC” strains
Fig. 3Average pmol/min conversion of ONPG was measured to determine membrane permeability of the parental FBR5 and 20 isolated mutant strains in the absence and presence of 4% ethanol at 30 °C and 37 °C. Data shown represents the results from at least three independent trials. The error bars represent one standard deviation above and below the mean of the data. Mutant strains are presented in the order of their MIC phenotypes (see Fig. 2) and 30 °C ONPG permeability; the brackets underneath the x axis correspond to the phenotype categories presented in Table 3. For each of the mutant strains, t-tests were performed to compare the results with those of FBR5 grown under the same conditions. Mutant results that are significantly different from FBR5 are indicated as a red dot (P < 0.05) or red asterisk (P < 0.01)
Categorization of mutants based on 30 °C permeability and ethanol MIC
| Parent Strain (Control) | High Permeability with High MIC Phenotype | Low Permeability with High MIC Phenotype | Low Permeability with High MIC Phenotype (Outlier)a | Low Permeability with Low MIC Phenotype |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FBR5 | ARL | ANG | ARR | ANA |
| ARM | ANJ | ANB | ||
| ARN | ARK | ANC | ||
| ARO | ARS | AND | ||
| ARP | ANE | |||
| ART | ANF | |||
| ANH | ||||
| ANI | ||||
| ARQ |
aSee text and Fig. 4
Observed mutational differences between E. coli strains FBR5 and MG1655a
| Function | Gene | Mutation | Description | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ethanol pathway |
| insertion ca. T152 | D-lactate dehydrogenase | b,c |
|
| 5′ del up to S397 | Pyruvate formate lyase | b | |
| Cellular respiration |
| T198I | Histidine protein kinase; regulates anaerobic fumarate metabolism in response to extracellular fumarate concentrations | |
| Cell wall |
| S268G | Transglycosylation of the muramic acid residue | |
| Membrane transport |
| del | Membrane protein; formate export | b |
|
| insertion ~ nt 2,940,787 | sRNA that represses | d | |
| Metabolic functions |
| insertion ca. E149 | Encodes tagatose-bisphosphate aldolase | c |
| Protein synthesis |
| 3′ del starting at A565 | Ribosomal protein S12 methylthiotransferase accessory factor | |
| Transcription |
| L300F | RNA polymerase alpha subunit | |
|
| Q33stop | RNA polymerase sigma subunit | e,f | |
| Pseudogenes |
| F261 L | ||
| Unknown function |
| E39E | Domain of unknown function 1116 family member; induced by NO | |
|
| possible insertion ~ V236 | ABC transporter of unknown function | ||
| Insertion sequences, transposons, and repetitive elements |
| CG insertion at nt 4,294,403 | Repetitive element | |
| Mutations outside of known genes | possible insertion ~ nt 2,985,196 | between | ||
| C → T at nt 3,957,957 | between |
aGenes previously implicated in ethanol tolerance are in boldface type. Abbreviations: del deletion, fs frameshift, nt nucleotide
bFBR5 carries disruptions of these genes as a consequence of its derivation from E. coli strain NZN111 [27]
cPreviously implicated in ethanol stress response in [28]
dOppA and several dpp genes (although not dppA) have been previously implicated in ethanol stress response in [28]
ePreviously implicated in ethanol tolerance in [29]
fPreviously implicated in alcohol tolerance in [30]
Fig. 4Comparisons of membrane permeability responses to environmental challenges. Symbols correspond to groups in Table 3. Ratios were calculated by comparing the average rate of uptake seen in Fig. 3 for an individual strain at the conditions indicated on the axis. Error bars are omitted for clarity. Solid black line indicates a slope of 1.0, thus representing no relative difference between the two environmental alterations indicated on the two axes. a Membrane permeability increase induced by ethanol exposure compared to the permeability induced by shifting culture temperature, b Permeability increase induced by temperature compared to the increase that results from the addition of ethanol and a temperature shift, c Permeability increase induced by ethanol exposure at 30 °C compared to the increase that results from the addition of ethanol and a temperature shift, d Effect of ethanol addition after a temperature shift and e Effect of temperature shift after ethanol exposure
Comparison of acyl chains detected in strains grown under different conditionsa
| Acyl Chainb | 30 °C without Ethanol | 30 °C with 4% v/v Ethanol | 37 °C without Ethanol | 37 °C with 4% v/v Ethanol | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FBR5 | ARR | ARS | FBR5 | ARR | ARS | FBR5 | ARR | ARS | FBR5 | ARR | ARS | |
| C12:0 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| C14:0 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| C14:1Δ7 | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. |
| C15:0 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| C16:0 | + | n.d. | n.d. | + | + | n.d. | + | + | n.d. | n.d. | + | n.d. |
| C16:1Δ9 | + | + | n.d. | + | + | n.d. | + | + | + | + | + | n.d. |
| C18:0 | + | + | n.d. | + | + | n.d. | + | + | n.d. | n.d. | + | + |
| C18:1 Δ9 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | n.d. | + | + | + |
| C18:1 Δ11 | n.d. | n.d. | + | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | + | n.d. | + | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. |
aAcyl chains compared to (ref. [40]). Abbreviations: +, lipid detected; n.d., not detected
bAcyl chains were isolated and converted to fatty acid methyl esters for analysis; see Methods
Mutations observed in ethanol tolerant strains derived from FBR5a
| Locus | High Permeability Strainsb | Low Permeability Strainsc | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Functional Category | Gene | Function | Mutation | High MIC | High MIC | Low MIC |
| Membrane Structure and Function | ||||||
|
| Component of a D-xylose ABC transporter | G67R | ARM* | |||
|
| Outer membrane polysaccharide exporter | insertion at ~ 2,134,249 nt | ARS* | |||
|
| Catalyzes formation of D-glycosyl-lipopolysaccharide | S359R | ANE, ANF | |||
|
| Presumed inner membrane protein with unknown function | G164 | ANE, ANF | |||
|
| O antigen assembly | V97E | ARQ* | |||
|
| Presumed periplasmic protein, unknown function | V34 M | ANC | |||
|
| sRNA regulating degradation of | P4T | ANC, AND | |||
| Ion Transport and Usage | ||||||
|
| Ferric citrate importe | V244 V | ARN, ARO* | ANG* | ANI* | |
|
| Active transport of Mg2+ into the cell | T170A | ARN | |||
|
| Iron retrieval from heme and PPIX | E151A | ANC, AND | |||
| Carbon Metabolism | ||||||
|
| Pyruvate formate lyase | N26D | ARL* | |||
|
| D-galactarate and D-glucarate metabolism | L151Q | ARK | |||
|
| Formate dehydrogenase | V87F | ANA* | |||
|
| Oxalate CoA-transferase | K317 T | ANE, ANF | |||
| Respiration | ||||||
| intergenic between | TMAO reductase | Insertion | ANJ | |||
|
| NADH deydrogenase IIf | R306R | AND | |||
| Protein Synthesis and Related Functions | ||||||
|
| tRNA genes | 779,852–780,370 deletion | ARN | |||
|
| Encodes 23S rRNA | Insertion at nt 3,943,588 | ANJ | |||
| Pyrimidine Metabolism | ||||||
|
| Carbamoyl phosphate synthase | W213S | ARP | |||
|
| Pyrimidine degradation | S32 T | ART | |||
|
| Carbamoyl-transferase | D289V | ANJ | |||
| Miscellaneous | ||||||
|
| Gyrase; nalidixic acid resistance | R739C | ARN | |||
|
| Inhibits growth of neighboring bacteria | T524A | ART | |||
|
| Inhibits growth of neighboring bacteria | Insertion at nt 3,762,076 and deletion at nt 3,763,391 | ANJ | |||
|
| hypothetical protein | A49T | ANJ | |||
|
| Histidine kinase regulating flagellar rotation (chemotaxis) | P618L | ARK | |||
| many genes | deletion | excision of e14 prophageg | ANE, ANF | |||
| No mutations detected in ORFs | ARR | ANB, ANH | ||||
aTable lists mutations detected in open reading frames; for full list of all observed mutations, please see Additional File 1: Table S1. Abbreviations and symbols: fs, framsehsift; MIC, minimal inhibitory concentration; nt, nucleotide position; ORF, open reading frame; PPIX, protoporphyrin IX; TMAO, trimethylamine-N-oxide; *indicates strains for which only a single nucleotide alteration from FBR5 was observed
bThese mutants display constitutively higher inner membrane permeability than FBR5 (see text and Table 3)
cThese mutants display inner membrane permeability that is either similar to FBR5 or is higher than FBR5 but not constitutively (see text and Table 3)
dVarious omp genes were implicated in ethanol stress response in [28]
ePreviously implicated in ethanol stress response [28]
fPreviously implicated in ethanol tolerance in [29]
gSee refs. [69, 70]
Fig. 5Survival curve data demonstrating the effect of fecA mutations on the ethanol tolerance phenotype of E. coli. Panel (a) depicts the performance of strains BW25113 and BW25113 ΔJW4251 (a fecA deletion strain) and Panel (b) depicts the performance of strains bMH33 and bMH34. Strains were grown for 60 min in 16.5% (v/v) ethanol, and viable cell counts were conducted at specific time points during that incubation period. In Panel (b), both cultures were also supplemented with 0.1 mM IPTG. For both panels, the data shown is the average of three technical replicates. Each of the plotted data points are the average of three independent trials. Error bars represent observed maximum and minimum values from all trials