| Literature DB >> 34635076 |
Christian Rapp1, Simone Pival-Marko1,2, Erika Tassano3, Bernd Nidetzky1,2, Regina Kratzer4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Published biocatalytic routes for accessing enantiopure 2-phenylpropanol using oxidoreductases afforded maximal product titers of only 80 mM. Enzyme deactivation was identified as the major limitation and was attributed to adduct formation of the aldehyde substrate with amino acid residues of the reductase.Entities:
Keywords: Aldo–keto reductase engineering; Biocatalyst stability; Enantiopure 2-aryl-1-propanol; Reductive dynamic kinetic resolution
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34635076 PMCID: PMC8507385 DOI: 10.1186/s12896-021-00715-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Biotechnol ISSN: 1472-6750 Impact factor: 2.563
Fig. 1Reductive enzymatic dynamic kinetic resolution of racemic 2-phenylpropanal
Apparent kinetic parameters of wild-type CtXR and substrate-binding-site mutants in the NADH-dependent reduction of racemic and (S)-2-phenylpropanala
| ( | Optical preference ratio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | |||||
| wild-type | 130 | 350 | 160 | 450 | 1.23 |
| D51A | 28·103 | 170 | 43·103 | 120 | 1.54 |
| W24F | 13b | N/A | 12 | N/A | 0.92 |
| W24Y | 10b | N/A | 9 | N/A | 0.90 |
| N310A | 88 | 280 | 68 | 330 | 0.77 |
| N310D | no activity | no activity | no activity | no activity | - |
aThe kinetic parameters were obtained using non-linear least-squares fitting of the experimental data to the Michaelis–Menten equation in SigmaPlot 2006 (version 10.0 for Windows). bWhen limited substrate solubility prevented saturation of the enzyme, kcat/Km was calculated from the slope of the Michaelis–Menten plot where the rate is linearly dependent on the substrate concentration. N/A not applicable
Conversions and product ee-values for the reduction of rac-2-phenylpropanal by isolated CtXR D51A.a,b
| Phenylpropanol (µM) | ||
|---|---|---|
| D51A (20) | 76 ± 3 | 41 ± 4 |
| D51A (3.4) | 51 ± 5 | 98 ± 2 |
| D51A (0.6) | 13 ± 5 | 99.1 ± 0.3 |
aNAD+ concentration 0.7 mM, reaction time 2 h. bThe phenylpropanol concentrations were measured by HPLC, the data represent the mean values of two reaction replicates and standard deviations from the mean. cThe enzyme activity (U/mL) was measured with 0.5 mM rac-2-phenylpropanal
Fig. 2Conversions and product enantiopurities for the reduction of 100 mM racemic 2-phenylpropanal using a lyophilized and rehydrated whole-cell catalyst. The effects of catalyst loading on product concentration (mM, bars) and product ee-value (%, crosses) were studied. The NAD+ concentration was 6 mM and the reaction time was 24 h. (The details are summarized in the Supplementary data, Table S1)
Conversions and product ee-values for the reduction of rac-2-phenylpropanal using a lyophilized and rehydrated whole-cell biocatalyst. The effects of catalyst loading, substrate concentration, coenzyme concentration and the addition of HBC (2-hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin) were investigated.a,b
| Catalyst loading | NAD+ | HBC | Phenylpropanol (mM) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 234 ± 16 | 95.1 ± 0.0 |
| 20 | 1 | 3 | 38 | 401 ± 10 | 94.1 ± 0.0 |
| 20 | 1 | 3 | 75 | 406 ± 2 | 93.3 ± 0.1 |
| 40 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 506 ± 14 | 92.2 ± 0.0 |
| 40 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 619 ± 24c | 93.3 ± 1.1c |
| 40 | 1 M fed-batch | 6 | 0 | 611 ± 12 | 94.0 ± 0.1 |
| 40 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 662 ± 9 | 94.1 ± 0.1 |
| 40 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 843 ± 31 | 93.1 ± 0.2 |
| 40 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 839 ± 36 | 92.9 ± 0.1 |
| 40 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 765 ± 31 | 92.3 ± 0.1 |
| 40 | 1 | 6 | 38 | 634 ± 8 | 94.3 ± 0.2 |
| 40 | 1 | 6 | 75 | 598 ± 7 | 92.9 ± 0.2 |
| 40 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 571 ± 10 | 95.4 ± 0.1 |
| 40 | 2 | 6 | 38 | 633 ± 2 | 93.4 ± 0.5 |
| 40 | 2 | 6 | 75 | 637 ± 22 | 92.2 ± 0.2 |
aReaction time 48 h. bThe data represent the mean values and deviations from the mean of two reaction replicates. cThe data represent the mean values and standard deviations of 7 reaction replicates
Literature survey of studies on the reductive enzymatic kinetic resolution of rac-2-phenylpropanal
| Entry | Bioreduction catalyst, | Reaction medium | Product | Enantiopurity | Aim of the study | Ref | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Free enzyme, coupled substrate 1,4-butanediol | 5 mM | Buffer pH 7.5, 1% v/v CH3CN, (2.5 mM 1,4-butanediol) | 5 mM (98%) | 95% | Probing the enzyme's coenzyme recycling ability using the oxidation of 1,4-butanediol into the corresponding lactone | 14 |
| 2 | Free enzyme, coupled substrate ethanol | 0.5 mM | Buffer pH 7.5, (0.5 M ethanol) | 0.38 mM (75%) | 98% | Investigation of DKR, including substrate racemization velocity | 10,15 |
| 3 | Free enzyme, phenylpropanal oxidation for NADH-recycling | 75 mM | Buffer pH 7.5; 4% v/v MTBE | 28 mM (37%) | 96% | Investigation of a biocatalytic asymmetric disproportionation (biocatalytic Cannizzaro reaction) | 12 |
| 4 | Free enzyme, coupled substrate ethanol | 165 mM | Buffer, 63% v/v isopropyl ether, (0.6 M ethanol) | 82 mM (50%) | 96% | Probing the enzyme's enantioselectivity and coenzyme recycling ability | 16 |
| 5 | Free enzyme, coupled substrate ethanol | 30 mM | Buffer pH 8, (5% v/v ethanol) | 28 mM (93%) | 93% | One-pot, two-step reaction: oxidation of | 1 |
| 6 | Immobilized enzyme, coupled substrate ethanol | 5 mM | Buffer pH 7.5, 50% v/v hexane, (0.5 M ethanol) | 4.2 mM (84%) | > 98% | Characterization of the immobilized catalyst | 17 |
| 7 | Immobilized enzyme, coupled substrate ethanol | 300 mM | Isopropyl ether (saturated with buffer), 0.5% buffer pH 7.0, (1 M ethanol) | 46 mM (15%) | 95% | Probing the enzyme's substrate scope and enantioselectivity in organic solvents | 11 |
| 8 | Free coupled substrate isopropanol | 30 mM | Buffer pH 7.4, (20% v/v isopropanol) | 23 mM (75%) | 95% | Development of enantioselective mutants | 8 |
| 9 | Free coupled substrate isopropanol | 10 mM | Buffer pH 7.4, (20% v/v isopropanol) | 7.5 mM (75%) | 92% | Development of enantioselective mutants | 8 |
| 10 | Free | 5 mM | Buffer pH 9, (5% ethanol) | 3.7 mM (74%) | 98% | Probing the enzyme's substrate scope and enantioselectivity | 9 |
| 11 | Immobilized coupled enzyme yeast formate dehydrogenase | 1 mM | Buffer pH 7, 5% v/v CH3CN (0.1 M formic acid) | 1 mM (100%) | 71% | Characterization of the immobilized catalyst | 13 |
| 12 | Free | 30 mM | Buffer pH 8, (5% v/v ethanol) | 29 mM (97%) | 94% | One-pot, two-step reaction: oxidation of | 1 |
| 13 | Free Evo-1.1.200 from Evocatal coupled substrate ethanol | 30 mM | Buffer pH 9, (5% v/v isopropanol) | 29 mM (95%) | 89% | One-pot, two-step reaction: oxidation of | 1 |
| 14 | 22 mM | M9 medium, 30% v/v organic phase (9:1 isopropyl ether: isooctane) | 4.4 mM (20%) | ~ 50% | Probing the host background activity | 30 | |
| 15 | coupled enzyme yeast formate dehydrogenase | 1000 mM | Buffer pH 7.5, (1.05 M formic acid) | 843 mM (98.8%, but product and substrate loss) | 93.1% | Process optimization for imroved enantiopurity and yield | This work |
Fig. 3Active site of wild-type CtXR with NAD+ (PDB 1MI3, [33]) and modelled substrates. A Xylose (blue carbons, red oxygens), B (S)- and (R)-2-phenylpropanal (S-enantiomer yellow carbons, R-enantiomer brown carbons, red oxygens), C (S)-2-phenylpropanal (yellow carbons, red oxygen), D (R)-2-phenylpropanal (brown carbons, red oxygen). Possible hydrogen bonds between substrates and the enzyme are shown as dashed lines, with distances in Å
Fig. 4Effect of the substrate-to-biocatalyst ratio (whole-cell biocatalyst) on product enantiopurity. Blue diamonds show the conversion of 100 mM rac-2-phenylpropanal with 4 and 10 gCDW biocatalyst, green diamonds with 1 M substrate and 40 gCDW, red diamonds with 1 M substrate and 20 gCDW, black crosses with 2 M substrate and 40 gCDW. (Data with error bars from reactions with 6 mM NAD+ are depicted. See also the section Optimization of 2-phenylpropanal bioreduction, Table 3)