| Literature DB >> 30687267 |
Hui Wei1, Wei Wang1, Hal S Alper2, Qi Xu1, Eric P Knoshaug3, Stefanie Van Wychen1,3, Chien-Yuan Lin1, Yonghua Luo1, Stephen R Decker1, Michael E Himmel1, Min Zhang1,3.
Abstract
Yarrowia lipolytica, known to accumulateEntities:
Keywords: Yarrowia lipolytica; cellobiohydrolase I; cellulosic biofuel; chemical chaperone; endoglucanase II; endoplasmic reticulum stress; fungal cellulolytic enzymes; lipid metabolism
Year: 2019 PMID: 30687267 PMCID: PMC6333634 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.03276
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Yarrowia lipolytica strains and plasmids.
| Strain, plasmids, or constructs | Description: (strain genotype and phenotype; cloned genes and MW of encoded proteins) | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Po1f | Genotype: MatA, leu2-270, ura3-302, xpr2-322, axp-2; Phenotype: Leu-, Ura-, ΔAEP, ΔAXP, Suc+ | |
| Po1g | Genotype: MatA, leu2-270, ura3-302::URA3, xpr2-332, axp-2; Phenotype: Leu-, ΔAEP, ΔAXP, Suc+, pBR platform | |
| YL101 | Previously named as Yl (EG II); expressing Tr eg2 (P07982; 42 kDa) with a hybrid promoter (hp4d) in parent strain Po1g. | |
| YL102 | Previously named as Yl (CBH II); expressing Tr cbh2 (P07987; 47 kDa) with a hybrid promoter (hp4d) in parent strain Po1g. | |
| YL151 | Previously named as Yl (chimeric CBH I); expressing chimeric cbh1 (Te CBH1 catalytic domain-Tr Linker-Tr CBM1; AAL89553 and P62694; 53 kDa) with a hybrid promoter (hp4d) in parent strain Po1g. | |
| HA1 | Genotype: Po1f Δpex10 Δmfe1 leu- ura+ DGA1; Phenotype: prevent peroxisome biogenesis and β-oxidation by Δpex10 and Δmfe1, respectively; enhance lipid synthesis by DGA1 overexpression. | |
| YL165-1 | Genotype: Po1f Δpex10 Δmfe1 leu- ura+ DGA1 chimeric cbh1 cbh2 eg2; Phenotype: prevent peroxisome biogenesis and β-oxidation by Δpex10 and Δmfe1, respectively; enhance lipid synthesis by DGA1 overexpression; co-express CBH I (with TEFin promoter) – CBH II (with GPD promoter) – EG II (with EXP1 promoter). | This study |
| pYLEX1 (i.e., pINA1269) | hybrid promoter (hp4d); selection marker gene (LEU2). | |
| pYLSC1 (i.e., pINA1296) | hybrid promoter (hp4d); secretion signal (XPR2 pre-region); selection marker gene (LEU2). | |
| pNREL151 | Chimeric cbh1 (Te CBH1 catalytic domain-Tr Linker-Tr CBM1; AAL89553 and P62694; 53 kDa) in SfiI/Xbal cut pYLSC1. | |
| pNREL162 | Chimeric cbh1-cbh2-eg2 cassette; cloned in vector pUC57. | This work |
| pNREL165 | Chimeric cbh1-cbh2-eg2 cassette; cloned in vector pYLEX1. | This work |
FIGURE 1Pedigree of transformants expressing single or multiple cellulases and the experimental outline for transformant characterization. The details for these strains are described in Table 1. CBH, cellobiohydrolase; EG, endoglucanase; FAME, fatty acid methyl esters.
FIGURE 2Plasmid construction for cellulase expression in Yarrowia lipolytica. (A) Plasmid construct 162 with CBH I-CBH II-EG II cloned in vector pUC57. (B) Plasmid construct 165 with CBH I-CBH II-EG II cloned in the Y. lipolytica expression vector pYLEX1, which carries Leu2 as a selection marker. More details are described in the Materials and Methods. Symbols and abbreviations: rep (pMB1), origin of replication derived from plasmid pMB1; t, terminator; ∗, ∗∗, and ∗∗∗ indicate the relatively low, middle and high expression levels of promoters, respectively.
Enzyme activity of supernatant or concentrated crude enzymes of transformants co-expressing CBH I-CBH II-EG II.
| Enzyme-Avicel incubation time (50°C) | 1× supernatant enzyme activity | 35× concentrated crude enzyme activity | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total Glu equiv. released g L-1 | % Avicel to Glu equiv. | Total Glu equiv. released g L-1 | % Avicel to Glu equiv. | ||
| 0 h | HA1 (EV) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| YL165-1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| YL165-5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| YL165-7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 1 h | HA1 (EV) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1% |
| YL165-1 | 0 | 0 | 1.56 | 31% | |
| YL165-5 | 0 | 0 | 1.19 | 24% | |
| YL165-7 | 0 | 0 | 0.63 | 13% | |
| 24 h | HA1 (EV) | 0 | 0 | 0.04 | 1% |
| YL165-1 | 0.30 | 6% | 2.78 | 56% | |
| YL165-5 | 0.24 | 5% | 2.48 | 50% | |
| YL165-7 | 0.14 | 3% | 1.34 | 27% | |
| 5 days | HA1 (EV) | 0.00 | 0% | 0.11 | 2% |
| YL165-1 | 0.53 | 11% | 3.45 | 69% | |
| YL165-5 | 0.50 | 10% | 3.28 | 66% | |
| YL165-7 | 0.26 | 5% | 1.55 | 31% | |
FIGURE 3Comparison of cellulase secretion levels between CBH I-CBH II-EG II co-expressing Y. lipolytica transformant YL165-1 and the individual, single cellulase expressing transformants. (A) Supernatant samples for western blot using anti-Tr CBH I antibody. (B) Supernatant samples for western blot using anti-CBH II antibody. (C) Supernatant samples for western blot using anti-EG II antibody. In (A–C), the upper panels show SDS–PAGE gels after staining, and the middle panels show the identically loaded gels used for the western blot, while the bottom panels show the densitometric analysis of the western blots, for which error bars indicate the SEM for three biological replicates; ∗ and ∗∗ indicate significantly different from the reference strains (that expressing single CBH I, CBH II, or EG II) with p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively. Lane 1, strain Po1g (transformed with empty vector) as the parent strain control for YL151, YL102, and YL101. Lane 2′, YL151 expressing chimeric CBH I; lane 2″, YL102 expressing CBH II; lane 2″′, YL101 expressing EG II. Lane 3, strain HA1 (transformed with empty vector). Lane 4, YL165-1. Loading amount was 22.5 μL supernatant per well. Cellulase titers (g L-1) are indicated by numbers in the western blot images.
FIGURE 4Comparison between the transcript and protein secretion levels for CBH I-CBH II-EG II co-expressed in Y. lipolytica transformant YL165-1. For the relative transcriptional data (in blue color), the transcriptional level for CBH II-encoding gene had the lowest mRNA level and was set at 1. The presented data were collected from three biological replicates, for which error bars indicate the SEM.
Cell mass and FAME analyses of Y. lipolytica transformant YL165-1 grown on mineral medium containing Avicel as sole carbon sources.
| Cell mass | FAME | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strain | Avicel consumed %[1] | Total DCW[2] | DCW of newly grown cells[3] | Yield[4] | Total newly formed FAME[5] | FAME% | FAME yield |
| g L-1 | g L-1 | g g-1 Avicel consumed | g L-1 | DCW basis | mg g-1 Avicel consumed | ||
| YL165-1 | 22.8 ± 0.56 | 2.7 ± 0.12 | 1.7 ± 0.12 | 0.28 ± 0.02 | 0.19 ± 0.02 | 10.2% ± 0.7% | 31 ± 3 |
FIGURE 5Comparison of growth curves between Y. lipolytica transformants expressing individual or multiple cellulases grown in YPD medium. Turbidity data were obtained from Bioscreen C, by which absorbance readings were taken every 15 min. The relative turbidity percentage values for HA1 (EV) and YL165-1 were calculated from the turbidity of the strain cultures at the end-point of the growth curve, with the turbidity of HA1 (EV) being set as 100%. HA1 (EV), strain HA1 transformed with empty vector; Po1g (EV), strain Po1g transformed with empty vector. The bars for SEM from triplicates at time points of 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, and 110 h were shown; ∗ indicates significantly different from the HA1 (EV) strain with p < 0.05.
Cell mass and FAME content in Y. lipolytica transformant YL165-1 cells cultured in moderate and high C/N media with or without a chemical chaperone.
| Row no. | Media and strains | Glucose | Cell mass | FAME | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consumed | OD600 | DCW | Yield | FAME% | Total | Yield | ||
| g L-1 | g L-1 | g g-1 sugar | DCW basis | amount g L-1 | mg g-1 sugar | |||
| 1 | HA1 (EV) | 29.2 ± 0.3 | 21.2 ± 0.7 | 11.9 ± 0.5 | 0.41 ± 0.02 | 27% ± 2% | 3.2 ± 0.2 | 113 ± 9 |
| 2 | YL165-1 | 29.3 ± 0.2 | 19.4 ± 0.8 | 10.5 ± 0.4∗ | 0.36 ± 0.02∗ | 15% ± 2%∗∗ | 1.5 ± 0.1∗∗ | 52 ± 6∗∗ |
| (Statistical analysis: Row 2 vs. row 1) | ||||||||
| 3 | HA1 (EV) | 12.6 ± 0.9 | 5.1 ± 0.2 | 3.1 ± 0.1 | 0.25 ± 0.02 | 28% ± 1% | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 69 ± 7 |
| 4 | YL165-1 | 48.0 ± 1.3∗∗ | 16.2 ± 0.6 | 10.1 ± 0.3 | 0.21 ± 0.01 | 34% ± 2%∗ | 3.4 ± 0.2∗∗ | 71 ± 4∗∗ |
| (Statistical analysis: Row 4 vs. row 2) | ||||||||
| 5 | HA1 (EV) | 16.1 ± 1.1 | 6.2 ± 0. 2 | 4.1 ± 0.3 | 0.26 ± 0.03 | 24% ± 1% | 1.0 ± 0.1 | 63 ± 8 |
| 6 | YL165-1 | 79.9 ± 0.1∗∗ | 35.3 ± 1.2∗∗ | 21.9 ± 0.5∗∗ | 0.27 ± 0.01∗ | 27% ± 2% | 5.9 ± 0.3∗∗ | 74 ± 5 |
| (Statistical analysis: Row 6 vs. row 4) | ||||||||
FIGURE 6Fatty acid profiles of Y. lipolytica YL165-1 vs. parent control strain HA1 (EV). (A) Cells cultured in YPD-3% glucose medium; (B) cells cultured in high C/N ratio medium; (C) cells cultured in high C/N ratio medium supplemented with the chemical chaperone TMAO. Data presented were the mean of three replicate measurements ± SEM. ∗ and ∗∗ indicate statistical significance of p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively, comparing the same fatty acid type between YL165-1 and parent control strain HA1 (EV) for (A–C), or comparing the SFA/UFA ratio (D) or lipid production (E) of the same cell lines in scenarios 2 or 3 against those in scenario 1. HA1 (EV), parent strain HA1 transformed with empty vector; SFA, saturated fatty acids; SFA/UFA, ratio of saturated fatty acids and unsaturated fatty acids; TMAO, trimethylamine N-oxide dihydride; UFA, unsaturated fatty acids.
FIGURE 7Comparison of fatty acid profiles of Y. lipolytica YL165-1 cells grown in four types of media with different carbon sources or C/N ratios. Data shown are the mean from three replicate measurements ± standard error of the mean (SEM). ∗ indicates the fatty acids for which MM-Avicel medium-grown cells have different relative levels from other media-grown cells.