| Literature DB >> 36005511 |
Yiming Li1, Weina Tian2,3, Zhongxiang Fu1, Wenqi Ye1, Xinwei Zhang1, Zhao Zhang1,2,4, Dongzhe Sun1,2.
Abstract
Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) is an omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) that is critical for the intelligence and visual development of infants. Crypthecodinium is the first microalga approved by the Food and Drug Administration for DHA production, but its relatively high intracellular starch content restricts fatty acid accumulation. In this study, different carbon sources, including glucose (G), sodium acetate (S) and mixed carbon (M), were used to investigate the regulatory mechanisms of intracellular organic carbon distribution in Crypthecodinium sp. SUN. Results show that glucose favored cell growth and starch accumulation. Sodium acetate limited glucose utilization and starch accumulation but caused a significant increase in total fatty acid (TFA) accumulation and the DHA percentage. Thus, the DHA content in the S group was highest among three groups and reached a maximum (10.65% of DW) at 96 h that was 2.92-fold and 2.24-fold of that in the G and M groups, respectively. Comparative transcriptome analysis showed that rather than the expression of key genes in fatty acids biosynthesis, increased intracellular acetyl-CoA content appeared to be the key regulatory factor for TFA accumulation. Additionally, metabolome analysis showed that the accumulated DHA-rich metabolites of lipid biosynthesis might be the reason for the higher TFA content and DHA percentage of the S group. The present study provides valuable insights to guide further research in DHA production.Entities:
Keywords: Crypthecodinium; DHA; acetyl-CoA; organic carbon distribution; starch; total fatty acid
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36005511 PMCID: PMC9409966 DOI: 10.3390/md20080508
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mar Drugs ISSN: 1660-3397 Impact factor: 6.085
Figure 1The effect of different carbon sources (G: glucose; M: mixed carbon sources; S: sodium acetate) on cell number (A), dry weight (B) and glucose consumption (C) in Crypthecodinium sp. SUN. Each sample was conducted with three biological replicates and the data points are represented as values ± standard deviation (SD). The statistical significance of the results was tested by a two-way repeated measures ANOVA; * significantly different from the G group within each time point (p < 0.05); ^ significantly different from the value of the previous time point in the same group (p < 0.05).
Figure 2The effect of different carbon sources (G: glucose; M: mixed carbon sources; S: sodium acetate) on total fatty acid (TFA) content (A), acetyl-CoA concentration (B), and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) content (C) in Crypthecodinium sp. SUN. Each sample was tested with three biological replicates, and the data points are represented as values ± SD. The statistical significance of the results was tested by a two-way repeated measures ANOVA; * significantly different from the G group within each time point (p < 0.05); ^ significantly different from the value of the previous time point in the same group (p < 0.05).
The percentage of fatty acid profiles (% of total fatty acid (TFA)) with different carbon sources in Crypthecodinium sp. SUN #.
| Time (h) | Group ^ | C14:0 | C16:0 | C16:1 | C18:0 | C18:1 | DHA | SFAs a | MUFAs b | PUFAs c |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | G | 2.63 ± 0.22 | 13.94 ± 0.62 | 34.24 ± 1.19 | 14.82 ± 1.19 | 6.86 ± 0.27 | 26.40 ± 0.03 | 32.14 ± 0.39 | 41.10 ± 0.93 | 26.76 ± 1.21 |
| 24 | G | 2.84 ± 0.02 | 11.74 ± 0.02 | 30.22 ± 0.99 | 13.19 ± 0.73 | 5.76 ± 0.01 | 34.56 ± 0.05 | 28.57 ± 3.34 | 35.98 ± 4.39 | 35.45 ± 6.63 |
| M | 3.42 ± 0.07 * | 16.83 ± 0.38 * | 25.50 ± 0.59 * | 8.46 ± 0.23 * | 7.78 ± 0.02 | 36.32 ± 0.81 | 29.63 ± 0.22 | 34.48 ± 1.82 | 36.62 ± 3.75 | |
| S | 3.04 ± 0.10 * | 18.13 ± 0.17 * | 25.62 ± 0.79 * | 6.78 ± 0.59 * | 8.86 ± 0.01 * | 36.04 ± 0.15 | 28.91 ± 2.18 | 33.28 ± 0.50 | 37.09 ± 0.71 | |
| 48 | G | 3.22 ± 0.05 | 13.77 ± 0.01 | 32.06 ± 0.48 | 12.57 ± 0.37 | 5.95 ± 0.00 | 31.04 ± 0.07 | 30.15 ± 2.54 | 38.02 ± 2.70 | 31.83 ± 5.20 |
| M | 3.91 ± 0.02 | 19.50 ± 0.04 * | 22.28 ± 0.49 * | 5.31 ± 0.37 * | 7.36 ± 0.02 | 39.71 ± 0.15 * | 30.13 ± 0.99 | 32.13 ± 1.18 * | 35.86 ± 1.99 * | |
| S | 3.56 ± 0.02 | 18.11 ± 0.12 * | 25.24 ± 0.32 * | 9.13 ± 0.28 * | 6.89 ± 0.02 | 35.40 ± 0.30 | 32.01 ± 0.81 | 29.64 ± 1.72 * | 40.22 ± 2.72 * | |
| 72 | G | 3.21 ± 0.01 | 17.95 ± 0.02 | 29.34 ± 0.05 | 8.44 ± 0.02 | 7.40 ± 0.01 | 32.18 ± 0.05 | 30.50 ± 0.09 | 36.73 ± 0.30 | 32.77 ± 0.32 |
| M | 2.95 ± 0.01 | 18.52 ± 0.02 | 22.11 ± 0.23 * | 4.83 ± 0.18 * | 6.76 ± 0.01 | 42.83 ± 0.09 * | 27.72 ± 0.51 | 28.95 ± 2.40 * | 39.66 ± 3.53 * | |
| S | 4.00 ± 0.06 * | 18.98 ± 0.05 | 22.49 ± 1.36 * | 7.15 ± 1.00 | 6.46 ± 0.00 | 39.23 ± 0.04 * | 31.38 ± 1.13 | 28.87 ± 0.75 * | 43.41 ± 1.26 * | |
| 96 | G | 3.47 ± 0.01 | 19.15 ± 0.01 | 27.06 ± 0.11 | 6.28 ± 0.08 | 7.75 ± 0.01 | 34.99 ± 0.04 | 29.69 ± 0.42 | 34.81 ± 0.35 | 35.50 ± 0.76 |
| M | 1.84 ± 0.08 * | 15.87 ± 0.62 * | 26.95 ± 1.49 | 8.52 ± 0.80 | 8.00 ± 0.02 | 36.84 ± 1.42 | 27.69 ± 1.72 | 27.58 ± 0.77 * | 41.70 ± 1.07 * | |
| S | 3.92 ± 0.02 * | 19.64 ± 0.09 | 21.00 ± 0.39 * | 5.77 ± 0.27 | 6.58 ± 0.01 | 41.30 ± 0.15 * | 30.72 ± 0.31 | 34.95 ± 2.28 | 37.36 ± 4.00 |
# Explanation for the fatty acid abbreviation notation: C14:0: myristic acid; C16:0: palmitic acid; C16:1: palmitoleic acid; C18:0: stearic acid; C18:1: oleic acid; DHA: docosahexaenoic acid. ^ The G, M and S group stand for glucose, mixed carbon sources and sodium acetate, respectively. a The sum of the percentage of saturated fatty acids (% of TFA). b The sum of the percentage of monounsaturated saturated fatty acids (% of TFA). c The sum of the percentage of polyunsaturated fatty acids (% of TFA). * Significantly different from the G group within each time point (p < 0.0167 with Bonferroni correction).
Figure 3The effect of different carbon sources (G: glucose; M: mixed carbon sources; S: sodium acetate) on the starch content (A) and protein content (B) in Crypthecodinium sp. SUN. Three biological replicates were obtained for each sample. The data points are represented as values ± SD. The statistical significance of the results was tested by a two-way repeated measures ANOVA; * significantly different from the G group within each time point (p < 0.05); ^ significantly different from the value of the previous time point in the same group (p < 0.05).
Figure 4Comparative transcriptome analysis of Crypthecodinium sp. SUN cells cultivated with different carbon sources for 6, 12, 24 and 48 h. The heatmap shows the Log2 (Fold Change) value of gene expression levels at each time point compared with 0 h. Genes are shown in red (upregulated) and blue (downregulated). See Supplementary file 1: Figure S4 for more details of the RNA-seq data.
Overview of the differentially produced intracellular metabolites detected in Crypthecodinium. sp. SUN cultivated with different carbon sources.
| Pathway | Metabolite | Group | Log2FC # | VIP | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 h | 48 h | 12 h | 48 h | 12 h | 48 h | |||
| Lipid metabolism | Lyso PC (14:0/0:0) | G | 0.77 | 1.69 | 0.51 | 1.51 | 0.0002 | 0.0000 |
| M | 2.90 | 2.26 | 1.65 | 1.34 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | ||
| S | 2.13 | 1.58 | 1.20 | 0.93 | 0.0000 | 0.0018 | ||
| Lyso PC (16:0) | G | 1.15 | −0.57 | 5.09 | 3.43 | 0.0000 | 0.0250 | |
| M | 1.00 | −0.82 | 4.62 | 2.98 | 0.0001 | 0.0068 | ||
| S | 1.22 | −1.20 | 5.46 | 3.66 | 0.0000 | 0.0027 | ||
| Lyso PC (22:6) | G | 1.26 | 0.78 | 9.93 | 11.10 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | |
| M | 1.60 | 1.74 | 12.17 | 13.97 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | ||
| S | 1.35 | 1.30 | 10.80 | 9.70 | 0.0000 | 0.0113 | ||
| PC (14:0/22:6) | G | 9.87 | 0.30 | 1.25 | 0.02 | 0.0001 | 0.5223 | |
| M | 0.30 | 0.56 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.5223 | 0.5691 | ||
| S | 11.26 | 5.25 | 2.11 | 0.18 | 0.0001 | 0.2076 | ||
| PE (18:1/22:6) | G | 4.83 | 1.24 | 2.29 | 0.78 | 0.0181 | 0.0346 | |
| M | 4.48 | −0.14 | 2.19 | 0.05 | 0.0035 | 0.8663 | ||
| S | 5.07 | 0.69 | 2.83 | 0.28 | 0.0025 | 0.2742 | ||
| PC (22:6/22:6) | G | 4.87 | 0.39 | 2.05 | 0.16 | 0.0000 | 0.5500 | |
| M | 4.95 | −2.48 | 2.14 | 0.32 | 0.0000 | 0.0245 | ||
| S | 5.25 | 1.17 | 2.41 | 0.33 | 0.0000 | 0.1300 | ||
| Energy metabolism | Citric acid | G | −2.08 | −0.50 | 1.66 | 1.62 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
| M | 0.47 | 0.96 | 1.18 | 1.99 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | ||
| S | 0.64 | 1.38 | 1.44 | 2.72 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | ||
| Pyruvate metabolism | S- Lactoylglutathione | G | −6.02 | 0.33 | 5.47 | 3.64 | 0.0000 | 0.0149 |
| M | −4.09 | −4.57 | 5.48 | 5.82 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | ||
| S | −4.06 | −5.03 | 5.53 | 6.15 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | ||
| Pentose phosphate pathway | Gluconolactone | G | −1.42 | −0.80 | 1.71 | 2.27 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
| M | −1.18 | −1.34 | 1.66 | 1.77 | 0.0000 | 0.0001 | ||
| S | −1.78 | −2.51 | 1.92 | 2.28 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | ||
| Gluconic acid | G | 0.75 | 1.29 | 1.10 | 2.60 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | |
| M | −1.38 | 0.35 | 1.09 | 0.37 | 0.0000 | 0.4299 | ||
| S | −2.36 | −0.56 | 1.27 | 0.70 | 0.0000 | 0.0286 | ||
# The Log2FC stands for the relative abundance at each time point compared with that of the G group at 0 h.