酿酒酵母人工杂合启动子与天然启动子活性比较

doi:10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2017.01.013

生物技术通报 ›› 2017, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (1): 120-128.doi: 10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2017.01.013

酿酒酵母人工杂合启动子与天然启动子活性比较

唐瑞琪¹，熊亮²，白凤武^{1， 2}，赵心清¹

1. 上海交通大学生命科学技术学院，上海 200240；
2. 大连理工大学生命科学与技术学院，大连 116023

收稿日期:2016-10-20 出版日期:2017-01-25 发布日期:2017-01-19
作者简介:唐瑞琪，女，博士研究生，研究方向：酿酒酵母代谢工程改造;E-mail：rq_tang@sjtu.edu.cn
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目（31461143029,5151101168）

Activity Comparison of the Artificial Hybrid Promoter with Its Native Promoter in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

TANG Rui-qi¹, XIONG Liang², BAI Feng-wu^{1, 2}, ZHAO Xin-qing¹

1. School of Life Science and Biotechnology,Shanghai Jiao Tong University,Shanghai 200240;
2. School of Life Science and Biotechnology,Dalian University of Technology,Dalian 116023

Received:2016-10-20 Published:2017-01-25 Online:2017-01-19

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 系统地比较了人工启动子PaTEF1与天然启动子PTEF1和PTDH3在不同条件下的活性差别，结果表明，人工启动子PaTEF1的活性并不是在任何条件下都高于天然启动子的活性，而与宿主、培养基以及细胞生长阶段有关。在3个宿主背景中，BY4741中PaTEF1的活性最高，而LX03中最低。在YPD100中，人工启动子PaTEF1活性分别为天然启动子PTEF1和PTDH3活性的1.4-4.6倍和0.9-2.0倍;而在YPE（5%和7%）中，PaTEF1活性与PTEF1和PTDH3活性之比在0.7-1.3以及0.8-1.3之间。在YPE中培养时，PaTEF1的活性为在YPD100中培养时的1.7-2.0倍，PTEF1和PTDH3的活性在YPE中为YPD100中培养时的2.7-7.1倍和1.3-3.4倍，启动子在YPE中的活性较YPD100中更高，但人工启动子的活性变化较天然启动子更小。此外，在不同遗传背景的菌株中，启动子活性从对数期早期到对数期中期和从对数期中期到稳定期的变化趋势不同。

关键词: 酿酒酵母, 人工杂合启动子, TEF1启动子, 宿主菌株, 环境条件

Abstract: The responses of promoter strengths of artificial TEF1 promoter（PaTEF1）and native promoter PTEF1 as well as PTDH3 were comprehensively compared. The strength of PaTEF1 was not always higher than PTEF1,but varied along with the genetic background of host,medium,and cell growth phase. Among the three investigated hosts,PaTEF1 showed the highest strength in BY4741,while the lowest in LX03. The strengths of PaTEF1 were 1.4-4.6 and 0.9-2.0 times of those of native promoters（PTEF1 and PTDH3）in YPD100 medium,respectively. The activities of PaTEF1 in YPE（5% and 7%）were 0.7-1.3 and 0.8-1.3 times of PTEF1 and PTDH3. The activity of PaTEF1 in YPE was 1.7-2.0 times of that in YPD100,whereas 2.7-7.1 and 1.3-3.4 times for PTEF1 and PTDH3,respectively. The activities of the promoters in YEP were higher than those in YPD100,however,the activity variation of artificial promoters was less than that of native promoter. In addition,the variation trends of promoter strengths from early-log to mid-log phase and from mid-log to stationary phase varied in different host strains.

Key words: Saccharomyces cerevisiae, artificial hybrid promoter, TEF1 promoter, host strain, environmental condition

唐瑞琪，熊亮，白凤武，赵心清. 酿酒酵母人工杂合启动子与天然启动子活性比较[J]. 生物技术通报, 2017, 33(1): 120-128.

TANG Rui-qi, XIONG Liang, BAI Feng-wu, ZHAO Xin-qing. Activity Comparison of the Artificial Hybrid Promoter with Its Native Promoter in Saccharomyces cerevisiae[J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2017, 33(1): 120-128.

参考文献

[1] Kavšček M, Stražar M, Curk T, et al. Yeast as a cell factory：current state and perspectives[J]. Microbial Cell Factories, 2015, 14（1）：1.
[2] Mnaimneh S, Davierwala AP, Haynes J, et al. Exploration of essential gene functions via titratable promoter alleles[J]. Cell, 2004, 118（1）：31-44.
[3] Weinhandl K, Winkler M, Glieder A, et al. Carbon source dependent promoters in yeasts[J]. Microbial Cell Factories, 2014, 13（1）：1.
[4] Blazeck J, Alper HS. Promoter engineering：recent advances in controlling transcription at the most fundamental level[J]. Biotechnology Journal, 2013, 8（1）：46-58.
[5] Blazeck J, Garg R, Reed B, et al. Controlling promoter strength and regulation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae using synthetic hybrid promoters[J]. Biotechnology Bioengineering, 2012, 109：2884-2895.
[6] Peng B, Williams TC, Henry M, et al. Controlling heterologous gene expression in yeast cell factories on different carbon substrates and across the diauxic shift：a comparison of yeast promoter activities[J]. Microbial Cell Factories, 2015, 14：91.
[7] Alper H, Fischer C, Nevoigt E, et al. Tuning genetic control through promoter engineering[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2005, 102（36）：12678-12683.
[8] Westfall PJ, Pitera DJ, Lenihan JR, et al. Production of amorphadiene in yeast, and its conversion to dihydroartemisinic acid, precursor to the antimalarial agent artemisinin[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2012, 109：E111-E118.
[9] Zhao XQ, Bai FW. Mechanisms of yeast stress tolerance and its manipulation for efficient fuel ethanol production[J]. Journal of Biotechnology, 2009, 144（1）：23-30.
[10] Blazeck J, Liu L, Redden H, et al. Tuning gene expression in Yarrowia lipolytica by a hybrid promoter approach[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2011, 77（22）：7905-7914.
[11] 熊亮, 程诚, 李凯, 等. 菊芋秸秆高浓度物料分步糖化及乙醇发酵[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2016, 22（3）：382-387.
[12] Sheff MA, Thorn KS. Optimized cassettes for fluorescent protein tagging in Saccharomyces cerevisiae[J]. Yeast, 2004, 21：661-670.
[13] Taxis C, Knop M. System of centromeric, episomal, and integrative vectors based on drug resistance markers for Saccharomyces cerevisiae[J]. Biotechniques, 2006, 40（1）：73-78.
[14] Gietz RD, Schiestl RH. High-efficiency yeast transformation using the LiAc/SS carrier DNA/PEG method[J]. Nature Protocols, 2007, 2（1）：31-34.
[15] Leavitt JM, Alper HS. Advances and current limitations in transcript-level control of gene expression[J]. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 2015, 34：98-104.
[16] Blazeck J, Alper H. Systems metabolic engineering：Genome-scale models and beyond[J]. Biotechnology Journal, 2010, 5（7）：647-659.
[17] Watanabe D, Kaneko A, Sugimoto Y, et al. Promoter engineering of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae RIM15 gene for improvement of alcoholic fermentation rates under stress conditions[J]. Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering, 2016, pii：S1389-1723（16）30202-X. doi:10. 1016/j. jbiosc. 2016. 08. 004.
[18] Rasool A, Zhang G, Li Z, et al. Engineering of the terpenoid pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae co-overproduces squalene and the non-terpenoid compound oleic acid[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 2016, 152：457-467.
[19] Partow S, Siewers V, Bjørn S, et al. Characterization of different promoters for designing a new expression vector in Saccharomyces cerevisiae[J]. Yeast, 2010, 27（11）：955-964.
[20] Vickers CE, Bydder SF, Zhou Y, et al. Dual gene expression cassette vectors with antibiotic selection markers for engineering in Saccharomyces cerevisiae[J]. Microbial Cell Factories, 2013, 12：96.
[21] Bai FW, Anderson WA, Moo-Young M. Ethanol fermentation technologies from sugar and starch feedstocks[J]. Biotechnology Advances, 2008, 26（1）：89-105.
[22] Yamauchi Y, Izawa S. Prioritized expression of BTN2 of Saccharomyces cerevisiae under pronounced translation repression induced by severe ethanol stress[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2016, 7：1319.
[23] Redden H, Alper HS. The development and characterization of synthetic minimal yeast promoters[J]. Nature Communications, 2015, 6：7810.
[24] Ganapathi M, Palumbo MJ, Ansari SA, et al. Extensive role of the general regulatory factors, Abf1 and Rap1, in determining genome-wide chromatin structure in budding yeast[J]. Nucleic Acids Research, 2011, 39（6）：2032-2044.

酿酒酵母人工杂合启动子与天然启动子活性比较

Activity Comparison of the Artificial Hybrid Promoter with Its Native Promoter in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	徐发迪, 徐康, 孙东明, 李萌蕾, 赵建志, 鲍晓明. 基于杨木（Populus sp.）的二代燃料乙醇技术研究进展[J]. 生物技术通报, 2023, 39(9): 27-39.
[2]	成婷, 苑帅, 张晓元, 林良才, 李欣, 张翠英. 酿酒酵母异丁醇合成途径调控的研究进展[J]. 生物技术通报, 2023, 39(7): 80-90.
[3]	祝瑛萱, 李克景, 何敏, 郑道琼. 酵母模型揭示胁迫因子驱动基因组变异的研究进展[J]. 生物技术通报, 2023, 39(11): 191-204.
[4]	孙言秋, 谢采芸, 汤岳琴. 耐高温酿酒酵母的构建与高温耐受机制解析[J]. 生物技术通报, 2023, 39(11): 226-237.
[5]	王文韬, 冯颀, 刘晨光, 白凤武, 赵心清. 氧化还原敏感型基因元件增强酵母木质纤维素水解液抑制物胁迫耐受性[J]. 生物技术通报, 2023, 39(11): 360-372.
[6]	崔新刚, 孙雅欣, 崔晓静, 邓雁文, 孙恩浩, 王俊芳, 崔红晶. 酿酒酵母TAP42基因在细胞壁应激反应中的作用[J]. 生物技术通报, 2021, 37(10): 57-62.
[7]	顾翰琦, 邵玲智, 刘冉, 刘晓光, 李玲, 刘倩, 李洁, 张雅丽. 酿酒酵母酚类抑制物耐受性脂质组学研究[J]. 生物技术通报, 2021, 37(1): 15-23.
[8]	吴宇, 王金华, 赵筱. GLN1基因过表达对提高酿酒酵母糠醛耐受性的研究[J]. 生物技术通报, 2020, 36(8): 69-78.
[9]	顾翰琦, 刘冉, 邵玲智, 徐岩岩, 王东岩, 张冬梅, 李洁. 酿酒酵母对酚类抑制物耐受性研究[J]. 生物技术通报, 2020, 36(6): 136-142.
[10]	陈永灿, 张建志, 司同. 酿酒酵母中基于CRISPR/dCás9的基因转录调控工具的开发与应用[J]. 生物技术通报, 2020, 36(4): 1-12.
[11]	李佳秀, 蔡倩茹, 吴杰群. 萜类化合物在酿酒酵母中的合成生物学研究进展[J]. 生物技术通报, 2020, 36(12): 199-207.
[12]	曹文妍, 王心凝, 沈煜, 李在禄, 鲍晓明. 酿酒酵母关联多药耐受性转录因子Yrr1p的研究进展[J]. 生物技术通报, 2020, 36(11): 148-154.
[13]	陈和锋, 朱晁谊, 李爽. 产瓦伦西亚烯酿酒酵母的表达载体适配及发酵碳氮源优化[J]. 生物技术通报, 2020, 36(1): 209-219.
[14]	黄贞杰, 陈由强, 薛婷. 过表达INO1基因提高酿酒酵母乙醇耐受性[J]. 生物技术通报, 2019, 35(3): 87-92.
[15]	李莎莎, 张梁, 石贵阳. 酿酒酵母糠醛耐受性状相关微卫星标记的筛选[J]. 生物技术通报, 2018, 34(8): 123-129.