1887

Abstract

Cyanobacteria are photoautotrophic micro-organisms, which are increasingly being used as microbial cell factories to produce, for example, ethanol directly from solar energy and CO2. Here, we analysed the effects of different salt concentrations on an ethanol-producing strain of Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 that overexpresses the pyruvate decarboxylase (pdc) from Zymomonas mobilis and the native alcohol dehydrogenase (adhA). Moderate salinities of 2 % NaCl had no negative impact on ethanol production, whereas the addition of 4 % NaCl resulted in significantly decreased ethanol yields compared to low-salt conditions. Proteomic analysis identified a defined set of proteins with increased abundances in ethanol-producing cells. Among them, we found strong up-regulation of α-1,4 glucan phosphorylase (GlgP, Slr1367) in the producer strain, which consistently resulted in a massive depletion of glycogen pools in these cells regardless of the salinity. The salt-induced accumulation of the compatible solute glucosylglycerol was not affected by the ethanol production. Glycogen and probably compatible solutes could present competing pools with respect to organic carbon, explaining the decreased ethanol production at the highest salinity.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000433
2017-03-29
2019-10-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/micro/163/3/300.html?itemId=/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000433&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Kerr RA. Climate change. Global warming is changing the world. Science 2007;316:188–190 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson LG. Ethanol fuel use in Brazil: air quality impacts. Energy Environ Sci 2009;2:1015–1037 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Oswald WJ, Golueke CG. Biological transformation of solar energy. Adv Appl Microbiol 1960;2:223–262[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ingram LO, Conway T, Clark DP, Sewell GW, Preston JF. Genetic engineering of ethanol production in Escherichia coli. Appl Environ Microbiol 1987;53:2420–2425
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Hu J, Xu Q, Wu M, Meng X, Song R et al. Improved ethanol production in the presence of cadmium ions by a Saccharomyces cerevisiae transformed with a novel cadmium-resistance gene DvCRP1. Environ Technol 2016;28:1–37
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Rogers PL, Jeon YJ, Lee KJ, Lawford HG. Zymomonas mobilis for fuel ethanol and higher value products. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol 2007;108:263–288
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Angermayr SA, Hellingwerf KJ, Lindblad P, Teixeira de Mattos MJ. Energy biotechnology with cyanobacteria. Curr Opin Biotechnol 2009;20:257–263 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Ruffing AM. Engineered cyanobacteria: teaching an old bug new tricks. Bioeng Bugs 2011;2:136–149 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Ducat DC, Way JC, Silver PA. Engineering cyanobacteria to generate high-value products. Trends Biotechnol 2011;29:95–103 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Shestakov SV, Khyen NT. Evidence for genetic transformation in blue-green alga Anacystis nidulans. Mol Gen Genet 1970;107:372–375 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Thiel T, Wolk CP. Conjugal transfer of plasmids to cyanobacteria. Meth Enzymol 1987;153:232–243[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Deng MD, Coleman JR. Ethanol synthesis by genetic engineering in cyanobacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 1999;65:523–528
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Gao Z, Zhao H, Li Z, Tan X, Lu X. Photosynthetic production of ethanol from carbon dioxide in genetically engineered cyanobacteria. Energy Environ Sci 2012;5:9857–9865 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Dienst D, Georg J, Abts T, Jakorew L, Kuchmina E et al. Transcriptomic response to prolonged ethanol production in the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. PCC6803. Biotechnol Biofuels 2014;7:21 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Atsumi S, Higashide W, Liao JC. Direct photosynthetic recycling of carbon dioxide to isobutyraldehyde. Nat Biotechnol 2009;27:1177–1180 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Lan EI, Liao JC. Metabolic engineering of cyanobacteria for 1-butanol production from carbon dioxide. Metab Eng 2011;13:353–363 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Liu X, Sheng J, Curtiss III R. Fatty acid production in genetically modified cyanobacteria. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2011;108:6899–6904 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Lindberg P, Park S, Melis A. Engineering a platform for photosynthetic isoprene production in cyanobacteria, using Synechocystis as the model organism. Metab Eng 2010;12:70–79 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Pade N, Erdmann S, Enke H, Dethloff F, Dühring U et al. Insights into isoprene production using the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803. Biotechnol Biofuels 2016;9:89 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Boussiba S, Sandbank E, Shelef G, Cohen Z, Vonshak A et al. Outdoor cultivation of the marine microalga Isochrysis galbana in open reactors. Aquaculture 1988;72:247–253 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Tredici MR, Materassi R. From open ponds to vertical alveolar panels: the Italian experience in the development of reactors for the mass cultivation of phototrophic microorganisms. J Appl Phycol 1992;4:221–231 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Takenaka H, Yamaguchi Y. Commercial-scale culturing of cyanobacteria: an industrial experience. In Sharma NK, Rai AK, Stal LJ. (editors) Cyanobacteria an Economic Perspective Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell; 2014
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Pade N, Hagemann M. Salt acclimation of cyanobacteria and their application in biotechnology. Life 2015;5:25–49 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Chisti Y. Constraints to commercialization of algal fuels. J Biotechnol 2013;167:201–214 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Galinski EA, Trüper HG. Microbial behaviour in salt-stressed ecosystems. FEMS Microbiol Rev 1994;15:95–108 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Hagemann M. Molecular biology of cyanobacterial salt acclimation. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2011;35:87–123 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Reed RH, Stewart WDP. Osmotic adjustment and organic solute accumulation in unicellular cyanobacteria from freshwater and marine habitats. Mar Biol 1985;88:1–9 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Fulda S, Mikkat S, Huang F, Huckauf J, Marin K et al. Proteome analysis of salt stress response in the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. strain PCC 6803. Proteomics 2006;6:2733–2745 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Marin K, Kanesaki Y, Los DA, Murata N, Suzuki I, Hagemann M. Gene expression profiling reflects physiological processes in salt acclimation of Synechocystis sp. strain PCC 6803. Plant Physiol 2004;136:3290–3300 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Carrieri D, Momot D, Brasg IA, Ananyev G, Lenz O et al. Boosting autofermentation rates and product yields with sodium stress cycling: application to production of renewable fuels by cyanobacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 2010;76:6455–6462 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Chaves JE, Kirst H, Melis A. Isoprene production in Synechocystis under alkaline and saline growth conditions. J Appl Phycol 2015;27:1089–1097 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Rippka R, Deruelles J, Waterbury JB, Herdman M, Stanier RY. Generic assignments, strain histories and properties of pure cultures of cyanobacteria. Microbiology 1979;111:1–61 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Sigalat C, de Kouchowski Y. [Fractionation and characterization of the photosynthetic apparatus from the blue-green alga Anacystis nidulans]. Physiol Veg 1975;13:243–258 (in French)
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Hagemann M, Ribbeck-Busch K, Klahn S, Hasse D, Steinbruch R et al. The plant-associated bacterium Stenotrophomonas rhizophila expresses a new enzyme for the synthesis of the compatible solute glucosylglycerol. J Bacteriol 2008;190:5898–5906 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Masuda T, Tomita M, Ishihama Y. Phase transfer surfactant-aided trypsin digestion for membrane proteome analysis. J Proteome Res 2008;7:731–740 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Geromanos SJ, Vissers JPC, Silva JC, Dorschel CA, Li G-Z et al. The detection, correlation, and comparison of peptide precursor and product ions from data independent LC-MS with data dependant LC-MS/MS. Proteomics 2009;9:1683–1695 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Shliaha PV, Bond NJ, Gatto L, Lilley KS. Effects of traveling wave ion mobility separation on data independent acquisition in proteomics studies. J Proteome Res 2013;12:2323–2339 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Distler U, Kuharev J, Navarro P, Levin Y, Schild H et al. Drift time-specific collision energies enable deep-coverage data-independent acquisition proteomics. Nat Methods 2014;11:167–170 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Silva JC, Gorenstein MV, Gz L, Vissers JP, Geromanos SJ. Absolute quantification of proteins by LCMSE: a virtue of parallel MS acquisition. Mol Cell Proteomics 2006;5:144–156 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Kramm A, Kisiela M, Schulz R, Maser E. Short-chain dehydrogenases/reductases in cyanobacteria. FEBS J 2012;279:1030–1043 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Borirak O, de Koning LJ, van der Woude AD, Hoefsloot HCJ, Dekker HL et al. Quantitative proteomics analysis of an ethanol- and a lactate-producing mutant strain of Synechocystis sp. PCC6803. Biotechnol Biofuels 2015;8:111 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Ball SG, Morell MK. From bacterial glycogen to starch: understanding the biogenesis of the plant starch granule. Annu Rev Plant Biol 2003;54:207–233[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Fu J, Xu X. The functional divergence of two glgP homologues in Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2006;260:201–209 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000433
Loading
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.000433
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary File 1

PDF
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error