Deconstructing the genetic basis of spent sulphite liquor tolerance using deep sequencing of genome-shuffled yeast

Biotechnology for Biofuels

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Pinel, Dominic ^a,c   Colatriano, David ^a   Jiang, Heng ^a,d   Lee, Hung ^b   Martin, Vincent Jj ^a  

^a Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d MCGILL UNIVERSITY HEALTH CENTRE   (Canada)

Author keywords

Complex trait; Evolutionary engineering; Genome shuffling; Reverse engineering; Tolerance; Yeast

Indexed keywords

BIOCATALYSTS; BIOLOGY; FITS AND TOLERANCES; GENE EXPRESSION; REVERSE ENGINEERING; YEAST;

COMPLEX TRAITS; EVOLUTIONARY ENGINEERING; GENE EXPRESSION ANALYSIS; GENOME SHUFFLING; GLUTAMATE DEHYDROGENASE; LIGNOCELLULOSIC HYDROLYSATES; TRANSCRIPTIONAL REPRESSORS; UBIQUITIN-MEDIATED PROTEOLYSIS;

GENES;

CATALYST; GENE EXPRESSION; GENOME; LIQUID; PHENOTYPE; SULFITE; YEAST;

SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE;

EID: 84927537696     PISSN: 17546834     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13068-015-0241-z     Document Type: Article

References (92)

1. Oud B, van Maris AJ, Daran JM, Pronk JT. Genome-wide analytical approaches for reverse metabolic engineering of industrially relevant phenotypes in yeast. FEMS Yeast Res. 2012;12:183-96.
2. Smith DR, Quinlan AR, Peckham HE, Makowsky K, Tao W, Woolf B, et al. Rapid whole-genome mutational profiling using next-generation sequencing technologies. Genome Res. 2008;18:1638-42.
3. Le Crom S, Schackwitz W, Pennacchio L, Magnuson JK, Culley DE, Collett JR, et al. Tracking the roots of cellulase hyperproduction by the fungus Trichoderma reesei using massively parallel DNA sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106:16151-6.
4. Sarin S, Bertrand V, Bigelow H, Boyanov A, Doitsidou M, Poole RJ, et al. Analysis of multiple ethyl methanesulfonate-mutagenized Caenorhabditis elegans strains by whole-genome sequencing. Genetics. 2010;185:417-30.
5. Harper MA, Chen Z, Toy T, Machado IM, Nelson SF, Liao JC, et al. Phenotype sequencing: identifying the genes that cause a phenotype directly from pooled sequencing of independent mutants. PLoS One. 2011;6:e16517.
6. Parts L, Cubillos FA, Warringer J, Jain K, Salinas F, Bumpstead SJ, et al. Revealing the genetic structure of a trait by sequencing a population under selection. Genome Res. 2011;21:1131-8.
7. Zhang YX, Perry K, Vinci VA, Powell K, Stemmer WPC, del Cardayre SB. Genome shuffling leads to rapid phenotypic improvement in bacteria. Nature. 2002;415:644-6.
8. Pinel D, D'Aoust F, del Cardayre SB, Bajwa PK, Lee H, Martin VJJ. Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome shuffling through recursive population mating leads to improved tolerance to spent sulfite liquor. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2011;77:4736-43.
9. Patnaik R, Louie S, Gavrilovic V, Perry K, Stemmer WPC, Ryan CM, et al. Genome shuffling of Lactobacillus for improved acid tolerance. Nat Biotechnol. 2002;20:707-12.
10. Dai MH, Copley SD. Genome shuffling improves degradation of the anthropogenic pesticide pentachlorophenol by Sphingobium chlorophenolicum ATCC 39723. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004;70:2391-7.
11. Biot-Pelletier D, Martin VJJ. Evolutionary engineering by genome shuffling. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2014;98(9):3877-87.
12. Almeida JRM, Modig T, Petersson A, Hahn-Hägerdal B, Lidén G, Gorwa-Grauslund MF. Increased tolerance and conversion of inhibitors in lignocellulosic hydrolysates by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Chem Technol Biotechnol. 2007;82:340-9.
13. Liu ZL. Molecular mechanisms of yeast tolerance and in situ detoxification of lignocellulose hydrolysates. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2011;90:809-25.
14. Liu ZL, Blaschek HP. Lignocellulosic biomass conversion to ethanol by Saccharomyces. In: Vertes A, Qureshi N, Yukawa H, Blaschek H, editors. Biomass to biofuels: strategies for global industries. West Sussex, U. K: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2010. p. 17-36.
15. Palmqvist E, Hahn-Hägerdal B. Fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates. I: Inhibition and detoxification. Biores Technol. 2000;74:17-24.
16. Richardson TL, Harner NK, Bajwa PK, Trevors JT, Lee H. Approaches to deal with toxic inhibitors during fermentation of lignocellulosic substrates. Acs Sym Ser. 2011;1067:171-202.
17. Pinel D, Gawand P, Mahadevan R, Martin VJJ. 'Omics' technologies and systems biology for engineering Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains for lignocellulosic bioethanol production. Biofuels. 2011;2:659-75.
18. Gorsich SW, Slininger PJ, Liu ZL. Physiological responses to furfural and HMF and the link to other stress pathways. J Biotechnol. 2005;118:S91-1.
19. Petersson A, Almeida JRM, Modig T, Karhumaa K, Hahn-Hägerdal B, Gorwa-Grauslund MF, et al. A 5-hydroxymethyl furfural reducing enzyme encoded by the Saccharomyces cerevisiae ADH6 gene conveys HMF tolerance. Yeast. 2006;23:455-64.
20. Keating JD, Panganiban C, Mansfield SD. Tolerance and adaptation of ethanologenic yeasts to lignocellulosic inhibitory compounds. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2006;93:1196-206.
21. Pinel D, Martin VJJ. Meiotic recombination-based genome shuffling of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Schefferomyces stiptis for increased inhibitor tolerance to lignocellulosic substrate toxicity. In: Patnaik R, editor. Engineering complex phenotypes in industrial strains. 1st ed. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2012. p. 233-50.
22. Helle SS, Murray A, Lam J, Cameron DR, Duff SJ. Xylose fermentation by genetically modified Saccharomyces cerevisiae 259ST in spent sulfite liquor. Bioresour Technol. 2004;92:163-71.
23. Olsson L, HahnHagerdal B. Fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates for ethanol production. Enzyme Microb Tech. 1996;18:312-31.
24. Parajó JC, Domíngues H, Domínguez JM. Biotechnological production of xylitol. Part 3: operation in culture media made from lignocellulose hydrolysates. Bioresour Technol. 1998;66:25-40.
25. Helle S, Duff S. Supplementing spent sulfite liquor with a lignocellulosic hydrolysate to increase pentose/hexose co-fermentation efficiency and ethanol yield. Final report-Natural Resources Canada-Tembec Industries; 2004. http://www.lifesciencesbc.ca/files/dufffinal-report.pdf.
26. Yassour M, Kaplan T, Fraser HB, Levin JZ, Pfiffner J, Adiconis X, et al. Ab initio construction of a eukaryotic transcriptome by massively parallel mRNA sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106:3264-9.
27. Nagalakshmi U, Wang Z, Waern K, Shou C, Raha D, Gerstein M, et al. The transcriptional landscape of the yeast genome defined by RNA sequencing. Science. 2008;320:1344-9.
28. Kumar P, Henikoff S, Ng PC. Predicting the effects of coding non-synonymous variants on protein function using the SIFT algorithm. Nat Protoc. 2009;4:1073-81.
29. Ng PC, Henikoff S. SIFT: predicting amino acid changes that affect protein function. Nucleic Acids Res. 2003;31:3812-4.
30. Sim NL, Kumar P, Hu J, Henikoff S, Schneider G, Ng PC. SIFT web server: predicting effects of amino acid substitutions on proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40:W452-7.
31. Ozkaynak E, Finley D, Solomon MJ, Varshavsky A. The yeast ubiquitin genes: a family of natural gene fusions. EMBO J. 1987;6:1429-39.
32. Modig T, Lidén G, Taherzadeh MJ. Inhibition effects of furfural on alcohol dehydrogenase, aldehyde dehydrogenase and pyruvate dehydrogenase. Biochem J. 2002;363:769-76.
33. Goldberg AL. Protein degradation and protection against misfolded or damaged proteins. Nature. 2003;426:895-9.
34. Hochstrasser M. Ubiquitin-dependent protein degradation. Annu Rev Genet. 1996;30:405-39.
35. Kimura Y, Tanaka K. Regulatory mechanisms involved in the control of ubiquitin homeostasis. J Biochem. 2010;147:793-8.
36. Hershko A, Ciechanover A. The ubiquitin system. Annu Rev Biochem. 1998;67:425-79.
37. Mukhopadhyay D, Riezman H. Proteasome-independent functions of ubiquitin in endocytosis and signaling. Science. 2007;315:201-5.
38. Finley D, Ozkaynak E, Varshavsky A. The yeast polyubiquitin gene is essential for resistance to high temperatures, starvation, and other stresses. Cell. 1987;48:1035-46.
39. Hanna J, Meides A, Zhang DP, Finley D. A ubiquitin stress response induces altered proteasome composition. Cell. 2007;129:747-59.
40. Leggett DS, Hanna J, Borodovsky A, Crosas B, Schmidt M, Baker RT, et al. Multiple associated proteins regulate proteasome structure and function. Mol Cell. 2002;10:495-507.
41. Hanna J, Leggett DS, Finley D. Ubiquitin depletion as a key mediator of toxicity by translational inhibitors. Mol Cell Biol. 2003;23:9251-61.
42. Chernova TA, Allen KD, Wesoloski LM, Shanks JR, Chernoff YO, Wilkinson KD. Pleiotropic effects of Ubp6 loss on drug sensitivities and yeast prion are due to depletion of the free ubiquitin pool. J Biol Chem. 2003;278:52102-15.
43. Hernández-López MJ, Garcia-Marqués S, Randez-Gil F, Prieto JA. Multicopy suppression screening of Saccharomyces cerevisiae identifies the ubiquitination machinery as a main target for improving growth at low temperatures. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2011;77:7517-25.
44. Kolling R, Hollenberg CP. The ABC-transporter Ste6 accumulates in the plasma membrane in a ubiquitinated form in endocytosis mutants. EMBO J. 1994;13:3261-71.
45. Hein C, Springael JY, Volland C, Haguenauer-Tsapis R, Andre B. NPl1, an essential yeast gene involved in induced degradation of Gap1 and Fur4 permeases, encodes the Rsp5 ubiquitin-protein ligase. Mol Microbiol. 1995;18:77-87.
46. Hicke L, Riezman H. Ubiquitination of a yeast plasma membrane receptor signals its ligand-stimulated endocytosis. Cell. 1996;84:277-87.
47. Lin CH, MacGurn JA, Chu T, Stefan CJ, Emr SD. Arrestin-related ubiquitin-ligase adaptors regulate endocytosis and protein turnover at the cell surface. Cell. 2008;135:714-25.
48. Goh WS, Orlov Y, Li J, Clarke ND. Blurring of high-resolution data shows that the effect of intrinsic nucleosome occupancy on transcription factor binding is mostly regional, not local. PLoS Comput Biol. 2010;6:e1000649.
49. Harbison CT, Gordon DB, Lee TI, Rinaldi NJ, Macisaac KD, Danford TW, et al. Transcriptional regulatory code of a eukaryotic genome. Nature. 2004;431:99-104.
50. Lee TI, Rinaldi NJ, Robert F, Odom DT, Bar-Joseph Z, Gerber GK, et al. Transcriptional regulatory networks in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Science. 2002;298:799-804.
51. Workman CT, Mak HC, McCuine S, Tagne JB, Agarwal M, Ozier O, et al. A systems approach to mapping DNA damage response pathways. Science. 2006;312:1054-9.
52. Zhu C, Byers KJ, McCord RP, Shi Z, Berger MF, Newburger DE, et al. High-resolution DNA-binding specificity analysis of yeast transcription factors. Genome Res. 2009;19:556-66.
53. Vyas VK, Berkey CD, Miyao T, Carlson M. Repressors Nrg1 and Nrg2 regulate a set of stress-responsive genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Eukaryot Cell. 2005;4:1882-91.
54. Kuchin S, Vyas VK, Carlson M. Snf1 protein kinase and the repressors Nrg1 and Nrg2 regulate FLO11, haploid invasive growth, and diploid pseudohyphal differentiation. Mol Cell Biol. 2002;22:3994-4000.
55. Mayordomo I, Estruch F, Sanz P. Convergence of the target of rapamycin and the Snf1 protein kinase pathways in the regulation of the subcellular localization of Msn2, a transcriptional activator of STRE (Stress Response Element)-regulated genes. J Biol Chem. 2002;277:35650-6.
56. Mira NP, Becker JD, Sá-Correia I. Genomic expression program involving the Haa1p-regulon in Saccharomyces cerevisiae response to acetic acid. OMICS. 2010;14:587-601.
57. Fernandes AR, Mira NP, Vargas RC, Canelhas I, Sá-Correia I. Saccharomyces cerevisiae adaptation to weak acids involves the transcription factor Haa1p and Haa1p-regulated genes. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2005;337:95-103.
58. Magasanik B. Ammonia assimilation by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Eukaryot Cell. 2003;2:827-9.
59. Ding MZ, Wang X, Liu W, Cheng JS, Yang Y, Yuan YJ. Proteomic research reveals the stress response and detoxification of yeast to combined inhibitors. PLoS One. 2012;7:e43474.
60. Mira NP, Palma M, Guerreiro JF, Sá-Correia I. Genome-wide identification of Saccharomyces cerevisiae genes required for tolerance to acetic acid. Microb Cell Fact. 2010;9:79.
61. Hess DC, Lu W, Rabinowitz JD, Botstein D. Ammonium toxicity and potassium limitation in yeast. PLoS Biol. 2006;4:e351.
62. Bayer TS, Hoff KG, Beisel CL, Lee JJ, Smolke CD. Synthetic control of a fitness tradeoff in yeast nitrogen metabolism. J Biol Eng. 2009;3:1.
63. Wegele H, Müller L, Buchner J. Hsp70 and Hsp90-a relay team for protein folding. Rev Physiol Biochem Pharmacol. 2004;151:1-44.
64. Verghese J, Abrams J, Wang Y, Morano KA. Biology of the heat shock response and protein chaperones: budding yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) as a model system. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2012;76:115-58.
65. Jones GW, Masison DC. Saccharomyces cerevisiae Hsp70 mutations affect [PSI+] prion propagation and cell growth differently and implicate Hsp40 and tetratricopeptide repeat cochaperones in impairment of [PSI+]. Genetics. 2003;163:495-506.
66. Loovers HM, Guinan E, Jones GW. Importance of the Hsp70 ATPase domain in yeast prion propagation. Genetics. 2007;175:621-30.
67. Duncan K, Edwards RM, Coggins JR. The pentafunctional arom enzyme of Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a mosaic of monofunctional domains. Biochem J. 1987;246:375-86.
68. Bauer BE, Rossington D, Mollapour M, Mamnun Y, Kuchler K, Piper PW. Weak organic acid stress inhibits aromatic amino acid uptake by yeast, causing a strong influence of amino acid auxotrophies on the phenotypes of membrane transporter mutants. Eur J Biochem. 2003;270:3189-95.
69. Yoshikawa K, Tanaka T, Furusawa C, Nagahisa K, Hirasawa T, Shimizu H. Comprehensive phenotypic analysis for identification of genes affecting growth under ethanol stress in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Fems Yeast Research. 2009;9:32-44.
70. Stambuk BU, Panek AD, Crowe JH, Crowe LM, de Araujo PS. Expression of high-affinity trehalose-H+ symport in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1998;1379:118-28.
71. Jules M, Guillou V, Francois J, Parrou JL. Two distinct pathways for trehalose assimilation in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004;70:2771-8.
72. Babrzadeh F, Jalili R, Wang C, Shokralla S, Pierce S, Robinson-Mosher A, et al. Whole-genome sequencing of the efficient industrial fuel-ethanol fermentative Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain CAT-1. Mol Genet Genomics. 2012;287:485-94.
73. Carreto L, Eiriz MF, Gomes AC, Pereira PM, Schuller D, Santos MA. Comparative genomics of wild type yeast strains unveils important genome diversity. BMC Genomics. 2008;9:524.
74. Dunn B, Levine RP, Sherlock G. Microarray karyotyping of commercial wine yeast strains reveals shared, as well as unique, genomic signatures. BMC Genomics. 2005;6:53.
75. Ask M, Mapelli V, Hock H, Olsson L, Bettiga M. Engineering glutathione biosynthesis of Saccharomyces cerevisiae increases robustness to inhibitors in pretreated lignocellulosic materials. Microb Cell Fact. 2013;12:87.
76. Stephen DW, Jamieson DJ. Amino acid-dependent regulation of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae GSH1 gene by hydrogen peroxide. Mol Microbiol. 1997;23:203-10.
77. Nijkamp JF, van den Broek M, Datema E, de Kok S, Bosman L, Luttik MA, et al. De novo sequencing, assembly and analysis of the genome of the laboratory strain Saccharomyces cerevisiae CEN.PK113-7D, a model for modern industrial biotechnology. Microb Cell Fact. 2012;11:36.
78. Langmead B, Trapnell C, Pop M, Salzberg SL. Ultrafast and memory-efficient alignment of short DNA sequences to the human genome. Genome Biol. 2009;10:R25.
79. Li H, Ruan J, Durbin R. Mapping short DNA sequencing reads and calling variants using mapping quality scores. Genome Res. 2008;18:1851-8.
80. Nakamura K, Oshima T, Morimoto T, Ikeda S, Yoshikawa H, Shiwa Y, et al. Sequence-specific error profile of Illumina sequencers. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39:e90.
81. Oyola SO, Otto TD, Gu Y, Maslen G, Manske M, Campino S, et al. Optimizing Illumina next-generation sequencing library preparation for extremely AT-biased genomes. BMC Genomics. 2012;13:1.
82. Xie C, Tammi MT. CNV-seq, a new method to detect copy number variation using high-throughput sequencing. Bmc Bioinformatics. 2009;10:80.
83. Artimo P, Jonnalagedda M, Arnold K, Baratin D, Csardi G, de Castro E, et al. ExPASy: SIB bioinformatics resource portal. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40:W597-603.
84. Baggerly KA, Deng L, Morris JS, Aldaz CM. Differential expression in SAGE: accounting for normal between-library variation. Bioinformatics. 2003;19:1477-83.
85. da Huang W, Sherman BT, Lempicki RA. Systematic and integrative analysis of large gene lists using DAVID bioinformatics resources. Nat Protoc. 2009;4:44-57.
86. Merico D, Isserlin R, Bader GD. Visualizing gene-set enrichment results using the Cytoscape plug-in enrichment map. Methods Mol Biol. 2011;781:257-77.
87. Merico D, Isserlin R, Stueker O, Emili A, Bader GD. Enrichment map: a network-based method for gene-set enrichment visualization and interpretation. PLoS One. 2010;5:e13984.
88. Cherry JM, Hong EL, Amundsen C, Balakrishnan R, Binkley G, Chan ET, et al. Saccharomyces Genome Database: the genomics resource of budding yeast. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40:D700-5.
89. Abdulrehman D, Monteiro PT, Teixeira MC, Mira NP, Lourenco AB, dos Santos SC, et al. YEASTRACT: providing a programmatic access to curated transcriptional regulatory associations in Saccharomyces cerevisiae through a web services interface. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39:D136-40.
90. Monteiro PT, Mendes ND, Teixeira MC, d'Orey S, Tenreiro S, Mira NP, et al. YEASTRACT-DISCOVERER: new tools to improve the analysis of transcriptional regulatory associations in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008;36:D132-6.
91. Teixeira MC, Monteiro P, Jain P, Tenreiro S, Fernandes AR, Mira NP, et al. The YEASTRACT database: a tool for the analysis of transcription regulatory associations in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006;34:D446-51.
92. Russell DW, Jensen R, Zoller MJ, Burke J, Errede B, Smith M, et al. Structure of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae HO gene and analysis of its upstream regulatory region. Mol Cell Biol. 1986;6:4281-94.