4.6 Article

Dichomitus squalens partially tailors its molecular responses to the composition of solid wood

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 20, Issue 11, Pages 4141-4156

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1462-2920.14416

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Netherlands Scientific Organization [NWO 824.15.023]
  2. Academy of Finland [308284]
  3. Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland, WA, USA
  4. Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  5. CatchBio program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

White-rot fungi, such as Dichomitus squalens, degrade all wood components and inhabit mixed-wood forests containing both soft- and hardwood species. In this study, we evaluated how D. squalens responded to the compositional differences in softwood [guaiacyl (G) lignin and higher mannan content] and hardwood [syringyl/guaiacyl (S/G) lignin and higher xylan content] using semi-natural solid cultures. Spruce (softwood) and birch (hardwood) sticks were degraded by D. squalens as measured by oxidation of the lignins using 2D-NMR. The fungal response as measured by transcriptomics, proteomics and enzyme activities showed a partial tailoring to wood composition. Mannanolytic transcripts and proteins were more abundant in spruce cultures, while a proportionally higher xylanolytic activity was detected in birch cultures. Both wood types induced manganese peroxidases to a much higher level than laccases, but higher transcript and protein levels of the manganese peroxidases were observed on the G-lignin rich spruce. Overall, the molecular responses demonstrated a stronger adaptation to the spruce rather than birch composition, possibly because D. squalens is mainly found degrading softwoods in nature, which supports the ability of the solid wood cultures to reflect the natural environment.

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