| Literature DB >> 31312254 |
Sheng Xu1,2,3, Feng Wang1,2,3, Yuancheng Wang1,2,3, Riyuan Wang1,2,3, Kai Hou1,2,3, Chi Tian1,2,3, Yanting Ji1,2,3, Qianqian Yang1,2,3, Ping Zhao1,2,3, Qingyou Xia1,2,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Silk glands are used by silkworms to spin silk fibers for making their cocoons. These have recently been regarded as bioreactor hosts for the cost-effective production of other valuable exogenous proteins and have drawn wide attention.Entities:
Keywords: Glycosylation modification; High-efficiency production; Recombinant human lactoferrin; Silkworm
Year: 2019 PMID: 31312254 PMCID: PMC6612213 DOI: 10.1186/s13036-019-0186-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Biol Eng ISSN: 1754-1611 Impact factor: 4.355
Fig. 1Generation of rhLF transgenic silkworm. a Structural map of the transgenic vector. 3xp3RFP represents the selection marker of the transgene; SV40 indicates the termination codon sequence of sericin1 gene; Ser1 represents the promoter region of the sericin1 gene; Ser1PA indicates the poly A sequence of the sericin1 gene. b SDS-PAGE analysis of the cocoon proteins from 13 different transgenic lines. Lane 1–13, 13 transgenic cocoon sericin extracts; M and WT represent the marker and wild type samples, respectively. c Western blot analysis of rhLF in sericin crude extract from number 1–13, the thicker strip indicates the higher rhLF content. The individual with the highest rhLF content was selected to established the rhLF transgenic line. d The insertion site of the rhLF gene on the chromosome of the transgenic silkworm. The highest expression level of the rhLF transgenic silkworm was determined, and then backcross with a normal moth, its offspring were used for insertion site detection after the establishment of the silkworm strain. e The insertion site of the transgene in the rhLF transgenic silkworm genome, the target sequence “TTAA” specifically recognized by piggyBac transposase is highlighted in red
Results of transgenic vector microinjection
| Vector | Injectable line | Injected embryos (G0) | Hatched | G1 broods | G1 positive broods | Positive rate of G1 generation (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PhSrhLFSer1 | D9L | 200 | 84 | 43 | 12 | 27.9% |
Fig. 2Purification and secondary structure analysis of rhLF. a Purification of rhLF. M and WT represent the marker and wild type samples, respectively. Lane 1 represents the crude extract from cocoons. Lane 2 represents purified rhLF. Lane 3–5 represent 100, 250, 500 μg/ml of the rhLF-std, respectively. b Western blot analysis of the rhLF. c Detection rhLF after purification and dialysis. M represents the marker. Lanes 1–5 represent 5 batches of purified and dialyzed rhLF. d CD spectra of rhLF and rhLF-std. The rhLF and rhLF-std at the same concentration (0.5 mg/ml) were scanned within 190–250 nm
Contents of the secondary structure of rhLF and rhLF-std
| Samples | irregular curl (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| rhLF-std | 52.60 ± 1.30 | 10.35 ± 0.85 | 14.90 ± 2.20 | 22.50 ± 0.60 |
| rhLF | 51.20 ± 2.15 | 10.90 ± 1.20 | 15.30 ± 1.50 | 22.90 ± 1.10 |
Fig. 3N-glycosylation analysis of rhLF. a MS/MS spectra of N-glycopeptide RTAGWNVPTGTLRPFLNWTGPPEPIEAAVAR (AA 122–152) of rhLF. b MS/MS spectra of N-glycopeptide TAGWNIPMGLLFNQTGSCK (AA 467–485) of rhLF. c MS/MS spectra of N-glycopeptide NGSDCPDKFCLFQSETK (AA 627–641). d Percentage distributions of glycoforms were calculated by relative peak area average values. Green circle represent mannose; blue square represents N-acetylglucosamine; red triangle represents fucose.
Fig. 4Effect of rhLF on LPS-induced inflammation in RAW264.7 macrophages. Cells at a density of 5 × 104 cells/well were incubated with with a mixture of LPS (200 ng/ml) and various concentrations of purified rhLF for 12 h at 37 °C before the analysis. a Accumulated TNF-α in the culture medium was evaluated with a TNF-α detection kit. b Accumulated NO in the culture medium was evaluated with a Total Nitric Oxide Assay Kit. c The expressions of iNOs and β-actin in cells were determined by western blotting using specific antibodies. d Quantification of iNOs expression according to c using ImageJ software. The group of null means that rhLF and LPS were not added to the cells. Data shown are the mean ± SD of three experiments and are analyzed by one-way ANOVA, *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 relative to the control group
Fig. 5Inhibitory effect of rhLF on the growth of bacteria. a Inhibition of rhLF on the growth of E. coli. b Inhibition of rhLF on the growth of Bacillus subtilis. Data shown are the mean ± SD of four experiments and are analyzed by one-way ANOVA, *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 relative to the control group
Fig. 6Antibacterial activity analysis of rhLF. (a-e) E. coli was treated with PBS, rhLF, and rhLF-std for 60min, 1 μl of the mixture was plated on LB solid medium and cultured at 37 °C, and then photographed to record colony formation after 18 h. The scale bar is 1 cm. (f) The number of E. coli colonies was counted according to (a-e). Data are shown as mean ± SD of three experiments and were analyzed by one-way ANOVA, *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 relative to the control group