| Literature DB >> 35337369 |
Zhendong Bao1,2,3, Yuanmin Zhu1,2,3, Kai Zhang1,2,3, Yumei Feng1,2,3, Meng Zhang1,2,3, Ruili Li1, Longjiang Yu4,5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Schizochytrium sp. is a marine heterotrophic protist and an important sustainable resource for high value-added docosahexaenoic acid in the future. The production of different phenotypes during the continuous subculture of Schizochytrium sp. results in a serious reduction in lipid yield and complicates the used of this strain in scientific research and industrial production. Hence, obtaining an improved understanding of the phenotypic differences and molecular mechanisms underlying the cell-to-cell heterogeneity of Schizochytrium sp. is necessary.Entities:
Keywords: Flow cytometry; Lipid biosynthesis; Phenotypic heterogeneity; Schizochytrium sp.; Transcriptome analysis
Year: 2022 PMID: 35337369 PMCID: PMC8957170 DOI: 10.1186/s13068-022-02126-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biotechnol Biofuels Bioprod ISSN: 2731-3654
Fig. 1Comparative analysis of the fermentation performances and morphological characteristics of Schizochytrium sp. H016 after consecutive subculturing. a Biomasses and lipid yields of Schizochytrium sp. H016 during subculture. b Observation of the 10th generation strain under optical microscopy. c Flow cytometry analysis. The histogram shows the distribution of Nile red fluorescence intensity. FITC (x-axis) reflects the fluorescence intensity, and Count (y-axis) is the number of cells. d Dot blots of Schizochytrium sp. H016 subpopulations. The red dots are H016-H, and the green dots are H016-L. e Biomass, lipid content and lipid yield of the 10th generation strain and sorted strains
Fig. 2Microscopic morphology of H016-H and H016-L. Optical microscopy, SEM, TEM, and LSCM observations of cell morphology
Fig. 3Growth kinetics analyses and fatty acid composition of H016-H and H016-L. a Growth curves based on glucose residues, biomasses, and lipid yields. b TLC analysis of extracted lipids from H016-H (left lane) and H016-L (right lane). c TAG concentration of H016-H and H016-L during fermentation. d FFA concentration of H016-H and H016-L during fermentation
Comparison of the fatty acid profile between H016-H and H016-L
| Fermentation time (h) | Fatty acids profile of H016-H (%) | Fatty acids profile of H016-L (%) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C14:0 | C16:0 | DPA | DHA | C14:0 | C16:0 | DPA | DHA | |
| 24 | 8.51 ± 0.63 | 13.43 ± 0.56 | 10.21 ± 0.21 | 54.21 ± 1.00 | 10.34 ± 1.02 | 16.51 ± 0.91 | 8.90 ± 0.69 | 50.52 ± 1.77 |
| 48 | 10.27 ± 1.44 | 12.37 ± 1.35 | 10.30 ± 1.12 | 53.13 ± 0.42 | 9.38 ± 0.73 | 19.17 ± 1.55 | 9.64 ± 0.14 | 50.05 ± 1.12 |
| 72 | 8.90 ± 1.05 | 12.27 ± 1.04 | 10.52 ± 0.81 | 57.12 ± 0.23 | 6.66 ± 0.03 | 20.66 ± 0.57 | 9.38 ± 0.37 | 46.41 ± 1.19 |
| 96 | 5.03 ± 0.59 | 17.04 ± 1.44 | 11.71 ± 0.50 | 58.18 ± 0.41 | 5.86 ± 0.61 | 24.45 ± 1.68 | 10.15 ± 0.09 | 43.52 ± 0.51 |
| 120 | 3.59 ± 0.42 | 18.64 ± 0.86 | 13.00 ± 0.50 | 56.73 ± 0.71 | 5.89 ± 0.71 | 26.94 ± 0.54 | 9.84 ± 0.07 | 41.31 ± 0.89 |
| 144 | 3.40 ± 0.03 | 17.96 ± 0.48 | 13.09 ± 0.45 | 57.24 ± 1.10 | 5.84 ± 0.32 | 30.38 ± 0.91 | 9.61 ± 0.37 | 39.87 ± 1.00 |
Fig. 4Overview of transcriptome analysis during the fermentation of the two cell subpopulations. a PCA plot shows the clustering between transcriptome samples. b DEG number of upregulated and downregulated genes in H016-H and H016-L at the four fermentation stages. c KEGG pathway enrichment analysis of all DEGs
Fig. 5Differential expression of representative genes involved in various aspects of the cell cycle, including DNA replication, cell division, tubulin, and cell cycle regulation
Fig. 6Overview of the transcriptional reprogramming of the central carbon metabolic and lipid-related pathways in H016-H and H016-L at 24, 48, 96, and 144 h. The heatmaps show transcriptional differences in log2 (fold change) in H016-H relative to those in H016-L