4.6 Article

Shikimic acid production by a modified strain of E-coli (W3110.shik1) under phosphate-limited and carbon-limited conditions

Journal

BIOTECHNOLOGY AND BIOENGINEERING
Volume 92, Issue 5, Pages 541-552

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/bit.20546

Keywords

shikimic acid; cell physiology; Escherichia coli; chemostat; carbon limitation; phosphate limitation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Shikimic acid is one of several industrially interesting chiral starting materials formed in the aromatic amino acid pathway of plants and microorganisms. In this study, the physiology of a shikimic acid producing strain of Escherichia coli (derived from W31 10) deleted in aroL (shikimic acid kinase II gene), was compared to that of a corresponding control strain W31 10) under carbonand phosphate-limited conditions. For the shikimic acid producing strain (referred to as W31 10.shik1), phosphate limitation resulted in a higher yield of shikimic acid (0.059 +/- 0.012 vs. 0.024 +/- 0.005 c-mol/c-mol) and a lower yield of by-products from the shikimate pathway, when compared to carbon-limited condition. The yield of the by-product 3-clehydroshikimic acid (DHS) decreased from 0.076 +/- 0.028 to 0.022 +/- 0.001 c-mol/c-mol. Several other by-products were only detected under carbon-limited conditions. The latter group included 3-dehydroquinic acid (0.021 +/- 0.021 c-mol/c-mol), quinic acid (0.012 +/- 0.005 c-mol/c-mol), and gallic acid (0.002 +/- 0.001 c-mol/c-mol). For both strains, more acetate was produced under phosphate than the carbon-limited case. Considerable cell lysis was found for both strains but was higher for W3110.shikl ' and increased for both strains under phosphate limitation. The advantages of the latter condition in terms of an increased shikimic acid yield was thus counteracted by an increased cell lysis, which may make downstream processing more difficult. (c) 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available