| Literature DB >> 35955650 |
Naghmeh Poorinmohammad1,2, Jing Fu1,2, Bob Wabeke1, Eduard J Kerkhoven1,2.
Abstract
Given the strong potential of Yarrowia lipolytica to produce lipids for use as renewable fuels and oleochemicals, it is important to gain in-depth understanding of the molecular mechanism underlying its lipid accumulation. As cellular growth rate affects biomass lipid content, we performed a comparative proteomic analysis of Y. lipolytica grown in nitrogen-limited chemostat cultures at different dilution rates. After confirming the correlation between growth rate and lipid accumulation, we were able to identify various cellular functions and biological mechanisms involved in oleaginousness. Inspection of significantly up- and downregulated proteins revealed nonintuitive processes associated with lipid accumulation in this yeast. This included proteins related to endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress, ER-plasma membrane tether proteins, and arginase. Genetic engineering of selected targets validated that some genes indeed affected lipid accumulation. They were able to increase lipid content and were complementary to other genetic engineering strategies to optimize lipid yield.Entities:
Keywords: Yarrowia lipolytica; comparative proteomics; lipid accumulation; oleaginous yeast
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35955650 PMCID: PMC9369070 DOI: 10.3390/ijms23158517
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 6.208
Results of the chemostat cultivation of Y. lipolytica OKYL049 at different dilution rates under nitrogen limitation.
| Dilution Rate (h−1) | Residual Glucose (g/L) | q-Glucose (g/g/h) | Total Lipid (g/L) | Lipid Content (%) | Non-Lipid CDW (g/L) | CDW (g/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.02 | 10.03 ± 0.63 | 0.1 ± 0.005 | 1.06 ± 0.05 | 30 ± 0.46 | 2.51 ± 0.11 | 3.57 ± 0.16 |
| 0.03 | 11.94 ± 0.98 | 0.1 ± 0.004 | 1.04 ± 0.08 | 28 ± 1.27 | 2.68 ± 0.05 | 3.72 ± 0.12 |
| 0.04 | 15.05 ± 0.47 | 0.12 ± 0.003 | 0.88 ± 0.06 | 25 ± 1.09 | 2.61 ± 0.05 | 3.49 ± 0.10 |
| 0.05 | 16.58 ± 0.17 | 0.14 ± 0.019 | 0.84 ± 0.05 | 26 ± 1.61 | 2.36 ± 0.18 | 3.20 ± 0.20 |
| 0.06 | 16.44 ± 0.16 | 0.16 ± 0.011 | 0.95 ± 0.05 | 27 ± 0.89 | 2.53 ± 0.03 | 3.48 ± 0.07 |
| 0.08 | 18.68 ± 0.40 | 0.19 ± 0.006 | 0.67 ± 0.08 | 23 ± 1.90 | 2.30 ± 0.20 | 2.97 ± 0.26 |
| 0.12 | 19.61 ± 0.10 | 0.27 ± 0.015 | 0.43 ± 0.05 | 20 ± 1.39 | 1.71 ± 0.10 | 2.14 ± 0.14 |
| 0.16 | 20.74 ± 0.17 | 0.33 ± 0.054 | 0.28 ± 0.03 | 17 ± 1.55 | 1.37 ± 0.03 | 1.66 ± 0.03 |
Values are means ± standard deviation of the mean.
Figure 1Lipid production profile of Y. lipolytica OKYL040 at different dilution rates. (a) Lipid and biomass yields (L: lipid, s: substrate which is glucose here, xf: non-lipid biomass, x: biomass); (b) total lipid production; (c) fatty acid (FA) composition.
Figure 2Differential expression analysis on the proteomic data. (a) PCA (principal component analysis) plot highlighting similarities between individual replicates and clear separation between test groups; (b) box plots of examples of protein expression-change behaviors that the current study is or is not interested in (see text); (c) volcano plot highlighting differentially expressed proteins in OKYL049 with lower dilution rate compared to the control strain. The dots in red and blue indicate proteins with significantly altered levels (|log2 FC| > 1, p-value < 0.01).
Top 10 proteins with the largest differential expression upon maximized lipid yield.
| Protein Accession | Protein Annotation | GO (Molecular Function) | Change | log2 (FC) | −log10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q6C5X6 | Formate dehydrogenase | formate dehydrogenase (NAD+) activity [GO:0008863]; oxidoreductase activity, acting on the CH-OH group of donors, NAD or NADP as acceptor [GO:0016616] | Up | 2.48 | 8.64 |
| Q6CAP1 | - | carbohydrate:proton symporter activity [GO:0005351] | Up | 3.66 | 7.88 |
| F2Z678 | Alcohol dehydrogenase 2 | alcohol dehydrogenase (NAD+) activity [GO:0004022]; zinc ion binding [GO:0008270] | Up | 1.81 | 8.42 |
| Q6CI12 | - | hydrolase activity, acting on carbon-nitrogen (but not peptide) bonds, in linear amidines [GO:0016813]; peptidase activity [GO:0008233] | Up | 1.18 | 8.47 |
| Q6C676 | - | - | Up | 1.69 | 7.71 |
| Q6CBW3 | - | - | Down | 2.73 | 6.94 |
| Q92389 | Acid extracellular protease | aspartic-type endopeptidase activity [GO:0004190] | Up | 2.37 | 7.04 |
| Q6CBQ1 | Superoxide dismutase | manganese ion binding [GO:0030145]; superoxide dismutase activity [GO:0004784] | Up | 1.33 | 7.27 |
| Q6C395 | Triose phosphate isomerase | triose-phosphate isomerase activity [GO:0004807] | Up | 2.12 | 6.99 |
| Q6C8H3 | - | hydrolase activity, hydrolyzing O-glycosyl compounds [GO:0004553] | Down | 1.67 | 7.01 |
Figure 3Gene set analysis of protein expression at maximized lipid yield. Protein sets are defined by GO terms. For each GO term showing significant enrichment (in this figure: adjusted p-value < 0.02), the direction of the relative changes in protein levels are shown, together with the total number of proteins within each GO term. Note that GO term annotations are redundant and the same genes are likely members of multiple GO terms.
Selected mutation targets for experimental analysis of lipid accumulation in Y. lipolytica.
| Mutant (in OKYL049) | Mutant (in OKYL029) | Target Accession | Target Name | Biological Significance | FC Direction and | Mutation Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NJYL01 | NJYL08 | Q6C903 | Biotin synthase | Biotin shares biosynthetic precursors with lipids | Down, 5.4 × 10−3 | Knockout |
| NJYL02 | NJYL09 | Q6C6P6 | Arginase | Puts burden on cell energetically, produces ammonia to alleviate nitrogen limitation | Down, 5.4 × 10−7 | Knockout |
| NJYL03 | Q6CA74 | PapD-like protein | ER-PM tether which maintains ER homeostasis | Down, 9.8 × 10−5 | Knockout | |
| NJYL04 | Q6C375 | Similar to MdM1 | Role in lipophagy | Down, 2 × 10−3 | Knockout | |
| NJYL05 | NJYL10 | Q6C4M9 | HOG1 | A MAPK known to affect lipogenesis during osmotic stress | Down, 1.5 × 10−3 | Knockout |
| NJYL06 and NJYL07 | Q6C5X6 | Formate dehydrogenase | NADPH is a key cofactor for lipid biogenesis | Up, 2.3 × 10−9 | Overexpression, different promoters |
Figure 4Lipid phenotype of Y. lipolytica after genetic engineering of selected targets. Lipid content (a) and fatty-acid composition (b) of 7 mutants cultivated for 96 h in nitrogen-limited shaken flasks in comparison to Y. lipolytica OKYL049. (c) Time-course lipid content analysis of the three most promising mutants with OKYL049 as control. (d) Time-course lipid content analysis of mutants with the same genetic targets as in (c), but now implemented in the OKYL029 background. Data are presented as the average of three independent experiments, Error bars represent means ± standard deviation.
Y. lipolytica strains used in the current study.
| Genotype | Reference | |
|---|---|---|
| OKYL049 | MATa, ∆ku70::Cas9::DsdA, lntE1::Tef1inp-DGA1PEX20t, Δare1Δmhy1 | [ |
| OKYL029 | MATa, ∆ku70::Cas9::DsdA, Δmhy1 | [ |
| JFYL007 (Q4) | MATa, ∆ku70::cas9∆mhy1∆ARE1∆LRO1∆DGA1∆DGA2 | Unpublished |
| NJYL01 | MATa, ∆ku70::Cas9::DsdA, lntE1::Tef1inp-DGA1PEX20t, Δare1Δmhy1ΔYALI0D15400g | This study |
| NJYL02 | MATa, ∆ku70::Cas9::DsdA, lntE1::Tef1inp-DGA1PEX20t, Δare1Δmhy1ΔYALI0E07535g | This study |
| NJYL03 | MATa, ∆ku70::Cas9::DsdA, lntE1::Tef1inp-DGA1PEX20t, Δare1Δmhy1ΔYALI0D05291g | This study |
| NJYL04 | MATa, ∆ku70::Cas9::DsdA, lntE1::Tef1inp-DGA1PEX20t, Δare1Δmhy1ΔYALI0F02035g | This study |
| NJYL05 | MATa, ∆ku70::Cas9::DsdA, lntE1::Tef1inp-DGA1PEX20t, Δare1Δmhy1ΔYALI0E25135g | This study |
| NJYL06 | MATa, ∆ku70::Cas9::DsdA, lntE1::Tef1inp-DGA1PEX20t, Δare1Δmhy1, lntD1::Tefp- YALI0E14256g-lip2t | This study |
| NJYL07 | MATa, ∆ku70::Cas9::DsdA, lntE1::Tef1inp-DGA1PEX20t, Δare1Δmhy1, lntD1::Tefinp-YALI0E14256g-lip2t | This study |
| NJYL08 | MATa, ∆ku70::Cas9::DsdA, Δmhy1 ΔYALI0D15400g | This study |
| NJYL09 | MATa, ∆ku70::Cas9::DsdA, Δmhy1 ΔYALI0E07535g | This study |
| NJYL10 | MATa, ∆ku70::Cas9::DsdA, Δmhy1 ΔYALI0E25135g | This study |