| Literature DB >> 29685061 |
Yangyang Zheng1,2, Qianqian Yuan1, Hao Luo1,2, Xue Yang1, Hongwu Ma1.
Abstract
Poly-(3-hydroxybutyrate) (P3HB) is a polyester with biodegradable and biocompatible characteristics suitable for bio-plastics and bio-medical use. In order to reduce the raw material cost, cheaper carbon sources such as xylose and glycerol were evaluated for P3HB production. We first conducted genome-scale metabolic network analysis to find the optimal pathways for P3HB production using xylose or glycerol respectively as the sole carbon sources. The results indicated that the non-oxidative glycolysis (NOG) pathway is important to improve the product yields. We then engineered this pathway into E. coli by introducing foreign phophoketolase enzymes. The results showed that the carbon yield improved from 0.19 to 0.24 for xylose and from 0.30 to 0.43 for glycerol. This further proved that the introduction of NOG pathway can be used as a general strategy to improve P3HB production.Entities:
Keywords: Escherichia coli; NOG pathway; Poly-(3-hydroxybutyrate); genome-scale metabolic network analysis; glycerol; xylose
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29685061 PMCID: PMC5972911 DOI: 10.1080/21655979.2018.1467652
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioengineered ISSN: 2165-5979 Impact factor: 3.269
Figure 1.The original P3HB synthesis pathway (A, B) and the calculated optimal P3HB synthesis pathway ( C, D) with flux distribution in E.coli using xylose or glycerol as sole carbon source. The numbers show the reaction fluxes of each reaction. Abbreviations:Xu5P, xylulose 5-phosphate; R5P, ribulose 5-phosphate; G3P, glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate; S7P, sedoheptulose 7-phosphate; E4P, erythrose 4-phosphate; F6P, fructose 6-phosphate; Pyr, pyruvate; AcP, acetyl phosphate; DHA, dihydroxyacetone; DHAP, dihydroxyacetone phosphate; PEP, phosphoenolpyruvate.
Figure 2.Comparison of CDW, P3HB concentration, P3HB content and the carbon yield using xylose as the sole carbon source (A,B) and using both glucose and xylose (C, D) in the control and engineered E. coli strains.
Figure 3.Comparision of CDW, P3HB concentration, P3HB content (A) and the carbon yield (B) on glycerol (B) in the control E. coli and engineered E. coli strains.