| Literature DB >> 35036411 |
Sen Wang1,2,3,4,5,6, Weijian Wan1,2,5,6, Zhuojun Wang1,2,7,5,6, Huidan Zhang1,2,3,4,5,6, Huan Liu1,2,3,4,5,6, K K I U Arunakumara8, Qiu Cui1,2,3,4,7,5,6, Xiaojin Song1,2,3,4,7,9,5,6.
Abstract
Thraustochytrid is a promising algal oil resource with the potential to meet the demand for docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). However, oils with high DHA content produced by genetic modified thraustochytrids are not accepted by the food and pharmaceutical industries in many countries. Therefore, in order to obtain non-transgenic strains with high DHA content, a two-stage adaptive laboratory evolution (ALE) strategy was applied to the thraustochytrid Aurantiochytrium sp. Heavy-ion irradiation technique was first used before the ALE to increase the genetic diversity of strains, and then two-step ALE: low temperature based ALE and ACCase inhibitor quizalofop-p-ethyl based ALE were employed in enhancing the DHA production. Using this strategy, the end-point strain E-81 with a DHA content 51% higher than that of the parental strain was obtained. The performance of E-81 strain was further analyzed by component analysis and quantitative real-time PCR. The results showed that the enhanced in lipid content was due to the up-regulated expression of key enzymes in lipid accumulation, while the increase in DHA content was due to the increased transcriptional levels of polyunsaturated fatty acid synthase. This study demonstrated a non-genetic approach to enhance lipid and DHA content in non-model industrial oleaginous strains.Entities:
Keywords: adaptive laboratory evolution; docosahexaenoic acid; heavy-ion irradiation; lipid accumulation; thraustochytrid Aurantiochytrium
Year: 2021 PMID: 35036411 PMCID: PMC8759201 DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2021.795491
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Nutr ISSN: 2296-861X
Figure 1Overview of the modified ALE strategy. HI, heavy-ion irradiation; CS, cold stress; QE, quizalofop-p-ethyl.
Figure 2Analysis of the biomass and lipid profiles in SD116 and E-81. (A) Biomass, (B) lipid content, (C) DHA content, and (D) DHA purity in total fatty acids (TFA). **P < 0.01 and *P < 0.05.
Figure 3Characterization of cell growth (A) and biomass composition (B) in strains SD116 and E-81. **P < 0.01.
Figure 4Comparison of the transcription levels of key enzymes in fatty acid synthesis pathways of SD116 and E-81 strain. G6PDH, glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase; ME, malic enzyme; CS, citrate synthase; ICDH, isocitrate dehydrogenase; ACL, ATP citrate lyase; ACC, acetyl-CoA carboxylase; FAS, fatty acid synthase; PKS, polyketide-like polyunsaturated fatty acid synthase; OrfA, PKS subunit A; OrfB, PKS subunit B; OrfC, PKS subunit C; UDPGP, UDP-glucose pyrophosphorylase; NSC, no significant change; GP, growth phase; OP, oleaginous phase.
Figure 5Fed-batch fermentation of SD116 and E-81 strains. (A) Growth curve; (B) total lipid yield. **P < 0.01 and *P < 0.05.
The analysis of lipid and fatty acid composition in SD116 and E-81 at the end-point of fed-batch fermentation (5th day).
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| C14:0 (% TFAs | 2.90 ± 0.03 | 1.60 ± 0.60 | 0.036 |
| C16:0 (% TFAs) | 41.2 ± 0.46 | 33.9 ± 2.00 | 0.004 |
| C18:0 (% TFAs) | 3.01 ± 0.01 | 1.15 ± 0.32 | 0.001 |
| ARA (% TFAs) | 1.55 ± 0.01 | 1.17 ± 0.12 | 0.044 |
| EPA (% TFAs) | 1.10 ± 0.01 | 0.81 ± 0.09 | 0.030 |
| DPA (% TFAs) | 9.80 ± 0.08 | 8.48 ± 1.50 | 0.203 |
| DHA (% TFAs) | 39.2 ± 0.38 | 52.6 ± 2.50 | 0.001 |
| Palmitic acid yield (g/L) | 21.0 ± 0.6 | 20.0 ± 0.8 | 0.268 |
| DPA yield (g/L) | 5.00 ± 0.1 | 5.00 ± 0.6 | 0.847 |
| DHA yield (g/L) | 20.0 ± 0.5 | 31.0 ± 1.4 | 0.001 |
| Total PUFAs yield (g/L) | 27.0 ± 0.6 | 37.0 ± 1.3 | 0.001 |
| Total SFA yield (g/L) | 37.0 ± 0.6 | 37.0 ± 0.6 | 0.671 |
| Total lipid yield (g/L) | 51.0 ± 1.3 | 59.0 ± 0.4 | 0.001 |
TFAs, total fatty acids.