| Literature DB >> 32782474 |
Joana T Cunha1, Aloia Romaní1, Kentaro Inokuma2, Björn Johansson3, Tomohisa Hasunuma2,4, Akihiko Kondo2,4, Lucília Domingues1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Consolidated bioprocessing, which combines saccharolytic and fermentative abilities in a single microorganism, is receiving increased attention to decrease environmental and economic costs in lignocellulosic biorefineries. Nevertheless, the economic viability of lignocellulosic ethanol is also dependent of an efficient utilization of the hemicellulosic fraction, which contains xylose as a major component in concentrations that can reach up to 40% of the total biomass in hardwoods and agricultural residues. This major bottleneck is mainly due to the necessity of chemical/enzymatic treatments to hydrolyze hemicellulose into fermentable sugars and to the fact that xylose is not readily consumed by Saccharomyces cerevisiae-the most used organism for large-scale ethanol production. In this work, industrial S. cerevisiae strains, presenting robust traits such as thermotolerance and improved resistance to inhibitors, were evaluated as hosts for the cell-surface display of hemicellulolytic enzymes and optimized xylose assimilation, aiming at the development of whole-cell biocatalysts for consolidated bioprocessing of corn cob-derived hemicellulose.Entities:
Keywords: Cell-surface display; Consolidated bioprocessing; Industrial Saccharomyces cerevisiae; Lignocellulosic ethanol
Year: 2020 PMID: 32782474 PMCID: PMC7414751 DOI: 10.1186/s13068-020-01780-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biotechnol Biofuels ISSN: 1754-6834 Impact factor: 6.040
Composition of the pretreated corn cob and hemicellulosic liquors resultant of different hydrothermal treatments
| Preteatment conditions | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Solid yield (g of pretreated corn cob/100 g of corn cob) | 57 | 42 | 57 |
| Pretreated corn cob composition (g of component/100 g of pretreated corn cob) | |||
| Glucan | 49.6 ± 0.60 | 63.32 ± 2.20 | 54.46 ± 1.59 |
| Xylan | 10.05 ± 0.10 | 5.74 ± 0.12 | 10.80 ± 0.30 |
| Arabinan | 1.21 ± 0.10 | 0.39 ± 0.02 | 0.66 ± 0.02 |
| Acetyl groups | 0.53 ± 0.01 | 0.52 ± 0.06 | 0.87 ± 0.07 |
| Klason Lignin | 19.4 ± 0.60 | 18.53 ± 0.56 | 21.58 ± 0.88 |
| Liquid-phase composition (g/L) | |||
| Liquors | 29XPot | 32XPot | 54XPot |
| Glucose | 0.435 ± 0.012 | 0.353 ± 0.055 | 0.547 ± 0.023 |
| Xylose | 2.00 ± 0.07 | 5.01 ± 0.02 | 5.49 ± 0.22 |
| Arabinose | 1.46 ± 0.04 | 1.33 ± 0.02 | 2.37 ± 0.10 |
| Acetic acid | 1.06 ± 0.04 | 1.59 ± 0.01 | 2.42 ± 0.08 |
| Hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) | 0.0734 ± 0.0024 | 0.123 ± 0.000 | 0.166 ± 0.007 |
| Furfural | 0.408 ± 0.011 | 0.649 ± 0.000 | 1.40 ± 0.04 |
| Glucooligosaccharides | 2.04 ± 0.06 | 1.86 ± 0.06 | 3.36 ± 0.04 |
| Xylooligosaccharides | 26.5 ± 0.9 | 26.7 ± 0.9 | 48.8 ± 1.4 |
| Arabinooligosaccharides | 1.63 ± 0.19 | 1.25 ± 0.06 | 2.43 ± 0.23 |
| Acetyl groups | 2.29 ± 0.11 | 2.25 ± 0.14 | 4.6 ± 0.34 |
Treatments were performed under non-isothermal conditions
S0: severity; LSR: liquid-solid ratio
Fig. 1Saccharification capacity of the strains ER-X, PE-2-X, CAT-1-X and CA11-X. Assays were performed in xylan from beechwood (a) and in corn cob liquor 29XPot (b, c) at 40 °C. Inoculum for hydrolysis analyses was normalized by Units of xylanase activity (140 U/L; a, b) or by grams of fresh yeast (10 g/L; c). Data represents the average ± SD from at least two biological replicates
Saccharification parameters of the different S. cerevisiae strains displaying hemicellulolytic enzymes
| Substrate | Potential xylose (mM) | Inoculum | Strain | Xylosef (mM) | Xylitolf (mM) | Saccharification yield (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Xylan from beechwood | 68.1 | 140 U of xylanase activity/L | ER-X | 7.85 ± 0.40 | 9.72 ± 0.26 | 25.8 ± 1.0 |
| PE-2-X | 17.1 ± 0.1 | 9.98 ± 0.39 | 39.8 ± 0.4 | |||
| CAT-1-X | 11.4 ± 0.2 | 6.60 ± 0.51 | 26.4 ± 1.1 | |||
| CA11-X | 14.5 ± 0.1 | 14.1 ± 0.8 | 42.1 ± 1.1 | |||
| Liquor 29XPot ( | 184 | 140 U of xylanase activity/L | ER-X | 58.5 ± 0.6 | 16.5 ± 0.5 | 40.8 ± 0.6 |
| PE-2-X | 78.2 ± 0.0 | 11.5 ± 0.3 | 48.7 ± 0.2 | |||
| CAT-1-X | 62.9 ± 0.2 | 9.94 ± 0.14 | 39.6 ± 0.2 | |||
| CA11-X | 67.8 ± 3.2 | 22.9 ± 0.6 | 49.3 ± 2.1 | |||
| 10 g of fresh yeast/L | ER-X | 64.6 ± 1.6 | 24.4 ± 1.1 | 38.9 ± 1.6 | ||
| PE-2-X | 96.7 ± 5.9 | 13.8 ± 0.9 | 49.1 ± 1.6 | |||
| CAT-1-X | 81.1 ± 0.1 | 14.2 ± 0.1 | 44.5 ± 3.0 | |||
| CA11-X | 86.4 ± 3.0 | 23.4 ± 0.7 | 45.5 ± 1.6 |
Saccharification assays were performed in beechwood xylan or corn cob liquor 29XPot at 40 °C. Data represents the average ± SD from two biological replicates
S0: severity; LSR: liquid-solid ratio
Fig. 2Consolidated bioprocessing profiles of the strains ER-X-2P (a), CAT-1-X-2P (b) and CA11-X-2P (c). Assays were performed in corn cob liquor 29XPot with an inoculum of 50 g/L fresh yeast. Data represents the average ± SD from two biological replicates
CBP and SSF parameters of the different xylose-consuming S. cerevisiae strains in corn cob liquors
| Corn cob liquor | Potential xylose (g/L) | Strain (inoculum) | Glucosei (g/L) | Xylosei (g/L) | Xylosef (g/L) | Ethanolf (g/L) | Xylitolf (g/L) | Acetic acidi (g/L) | Acetic acidf (g/L) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liquor 29XPot ( | 24.2 | ER-X-2P (50 g/L) | 0.392 ± 0.003 | 1.80 ± 0.02 | 0.418 ± 0.016 | 6.51 ± 0.26 | 2.71 ± 0.00 | 1.13 ± 0.02 | 1.88 ± 0.02 | 0.112 ± 0.000 | 0.247 ± 0.010 |
| CAT-1-X-2P (50 g/L) | 0.392 ± 0.003 | 1.80 ± 0.02 | 1.77 ± 0.01 | 3.73 ± 0.37 | 3.97 ± 0.37 | 1.13 ± 0.02 | 1.99 ± 0.60 | 0.164 ± 0.015 | 0.142 ± 0.014 | ||
| CA11-X-2P (50 g/L) | 0.392 ± 0.003 | 1.80 ± 0.02 | 1.29 ± 0.17 | 4.80 ± 0.58 | 2.35 ± 0.14 | 1.13 ± 0.02 | 1.66 ± 0.09 | 0.0971 ± 0.0059 | 0.182 ± 0.022 | ||
| Liquor 32XPot ( | 31.6 | ER-X-2P (50 g/L) | 0.293 ± 0.003 | 5.02 ± 0.11 | 2.11 ± 0.28 | 8.15 ± 0.54 | 4.59 ± 0.42 | 1.81 ± 0.00 | 2.17 ± 0.20 | 0.145 ± 0.013 | 0.240 ± 0.016 |
| ER-X-2P (100 g/L) | 0.293 ± 0.003 | 5.02 ± 0.11 | 0.873 ± 0.019 | 11.1 ± 0.2 | 4.75 ± 0.13 | 1.81 ± 0.00 | 2.37 ± 0.01 | 0.150 ± 0.004 | 0.328 ± 0.005 | ||
| Liquor 54XPot ( | 50.7 | ER-X-2P (100 g/L) | 0.487 ± 0.010 | 4.62 ± 0.02 | 14.0 ± 0.8 | 4.23 ± 0.04 | 6.19 ± 0.67 | 2.53 ± 0.01 | 3.91 ± 0.34 | 0.122 ± 0.013 | 0.0778 ± 0.0008 |
| Whole slurry (liquor 54XPot with 5% solid loading) | 50.7 + 6.13 | ER-X-2P (100 g/L) | 0.487 ± 0.010 | 4.62 ± 0.02 | 14.4 ± 1.0 | 4.20 ± 0.15 | 6.41 ± 0.21 | 2.53 ± 0.01 | 3.72 ± 0.32 | 0.113 ± 0.004 | 0.0463 ± 0.0017 |
| Liquor 32XPot ( | 31.6 | ER-2P (100 g/L) | 0.466 ± 0.151 | 5.15 ± 0.19 | 0.976 ± 0.095 | 4.65 ± 0.16 | 0.760 ± 0.022 | 1.90 ± 0.16 | 3.38 ± 0.08 | 0.0240 ± 0.0007 | 0.137 ± 0.005 |
| ER-X-2P (100 g/L) | 0.466 ± 0.151 | 5.15 ± 0.19 | 6.55 ± 0.25 | 6.26 ± 0.06 | 5.40 ± 0.08 | 1.90 ± 0.16 | 3.41 ± 0.19 | 0.171 ± 0.003 | 0.184 ± 0.002 | ||
| Liquor 32XPot ( | ER-2P (100 g/L) | 0.466 ± 0.151 | 5.15 ± 0.19 | 1.02 ± 0.00 | 6.26 ± 0.10 | 0.854 ± 0.125 | 1.90 ± 0.16 | 3.65 ± 0.22 | 0.0270 ± 0.0040 | 0.184 ± 0.003 | |
| ER-X-2P (100 g/L) | 0.466 ± 0.151 | 5.15 ± 0.19 | 8.65 ± 0.02 | 6.00 ± 0.16 | 5.01 ± 0.08 | 1.90 ± 0.16 | 3.60 ± 0.24 | 0.159 ± 0.003 | 0.176 ± 0.005 |
Assays were performed at 40° C and oxygen-deprived conditions. Data represents the average ± SD from two biological replicates
S0: severity; LSR: liquid-to-solid ratio; Yet/potential sugar: ethanol yield from potential sugars; Yxyol/potential xyl: xylitol yield from potential xylose
Fig. 3Consolidated bioprocessing profiles of the strain ER-X-2P. Assays were performed in corn cob liquor 32XPot (a, b), corn cob liquor 54XPot (c) and corn cob liquor 54XPot with 5% solids (d) with an inoculum of 50 g/L fresh yeast (a) or 100 g/L fresh yeast (b–d). Data represents the average ± SD from two biological replicates
Fig. 4Simultaneous saccharification and fermentation profiles of the strains ER-2P (a, c) and ER-X-2P (b, d). Assays were performed in corn cob liquor 32XPot with addition of commercial hemicellulase (0.017% (v/v): a, b; 0.050% (v/v): c, d) with an inoculum of 100 g/L fresh yeast. Data represents the average ± SD from two biological replicates
Fig. 5Mass balance of consolidated bioprocessing and simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of the hemicellulosic liquor 32XPot
Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains and main plasmids used in this study
| Relevant features | Source | |
|---|---|---|
| Ethanol Red (ER) | Commercial ethanol yeast | Fermentis, S. I. Lesaffre, Lille |
| PE-2 | Isolated from a Brazilian first generation bioethanol plant | [ |
| CAT-1 | Isolated from a Brazilian first generation bioethanol plant | [ |
| CA11 | Isolated from a Brazilian “cachaça” fermentation processes | [ |
| ER-X | ER, pI23-BGL1-kanMX, pI5-XylA-NatMX, pδW-XYN-kanMX | This work |
| PE-2-X | PE-2, pI23-BGL1-kanMX, pI5-XylA-NatMX, pδW-XYN-kanMX | This work |
| CAT-1-X | CAT-1, pI23-BGL1-kanMX, pI5-XylA-NatMX, pδW-XYN-kanMX | This work |
| CA11-X | CA11, pI23-BGL1-kanMX, pI5-XylA-NatMX, pδW-XYN-kanMX | This work |
| ER-X-2P | ER-X, pMEC1049 + XI | This work |
| CAT-1-X-2P | CAT-1-X, pMEC1049 + XI | This work |
| CA11-X-2P | CA11-X, pMEC1049 + XI | This work |
| ER-2P | ER, pMEC1049 + XI | This work |
| Plasmids | ||
| pI23-BGL1-kanMX | SED1p–SED1ss– | This work |
| pI5-XylA-NatMX | SED1p–SED1ss– | This work |
| pCRE-hyg6 | CRE recombinase, | This work |
| pδW-XYN-kanMX | SED1p–SED1ss– | This work |
| pMEC1049 + XI | pYPK4-TEF1tp-XR (N272D)-TDH3tp-XYL2-PGI1tp-XKS1-FBA1tp-TAL1-PDC1tp, | [ |