4.5 Article

Point mutation of the xylose reductase (XR) gene reduces xylitol accumulation and increases citric acid production in Aspergillus carbonarius

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10295-014-1415-6

关键词

Xylose fermentation; Xylitol; Aspergillus carbonarius; Pentose catabolic pathway; Xylose reductase; Citric acid

资金

  1. SUPRA-BIO EU [241640-2]
  2. BIOREF DSF [09-065165]
  3. MYCOFuelChem [11-116803]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aspergillus carbonarius accumulates xylitol when it grows on d-xylose. In fungi, d-xylose is reduced to xylitol by the NAD(P)H-dependent xylose reductase (XR). Xylitol is then further oxidized by the NAD(+)-dependent xylitol dehydrogenase (XDH). The cofactor impairment between the XR and XDH can lead to the accumulation of xylitol under oxygen-limiting conditions. Most of the XRs are NADPH dependent and contain a conserved Ile-Pro-Lys-Ser motif. The only known naturally occurring NADH-dependent XR (from Candida parapsilosis) carries an arginine residue instead of the lysine in this motif. In order to overcome xylitol accumulation in A. carbonarius a Lys-274 to Arg point mutation was introduced into the XR with the aim of changing the specificity toward NADH. The effect of the genetic engineering was examined in fermentation for citric acid production and xylitol accumulation by using d-xylose as the sole carbon source. Fermentation with the mutant strain showed a 2.8-fold reduction in xylitol accumulation and 4.5-fold increase in citric acid production compared to the wild-type strain. The fact that the mutant strain shows decreased xylitol levels is assumed to be associated with the capability of the mutated XR to use the NADH generated by the XDH, thus preventing the inhibition of XDH by the high levels of NADH and ensuring the flux of xylose through the pathway. This work shows that enhanced production of citric acid can be achieved using xylose as the sole carbon source by reducing accumulation of other by-products, such as xylitol.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据