4.3 Article

Integrated Phospholipidomics and Transcriptomics Analysis of Saccharomyces cerevisiae with Enhanced Tolerance to a Mixture of Acetic Acid, Furfural, and Phenol

期刊

OMICS-A JOURNAL OF INTEGRATIVE BIOLOGY
卷 16, 期 7-8, 页码 374-386

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/omi.2011.0127

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) [2011CBA00802]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21020102040]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A mixture of acetic acid, furfural, and phenol (AFP), three representative lignocellulose-derived inhibitors, significantly inhibited the growth and bioethanol production of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. In order to uncover the mechanisms behind the enhanced tolerance of an inhibitor-tolerant S. cerevisiae strain (T), we measured the plasma membrane properties, which significantly influence cellular adaptation to inhibitors, of T strain and its parental strain (P) with and without AFP treatment. We integrated data obtained from multi-statistics-assisted phospholipidomics and parallel transcriptomics by using LC-tandem MS and microarray analysis. With the AFP treatment, the transcriptional changes of fatty acid metabolic genes showed a strong correlation with the increase of fatty-acyl-chain length of phosphatidylcholine (PC) and phosphatidylinositol (PI). This suggests a possible compensatory mechanism to cope with the increase of plasma membrane permeability and fluidity in both strains. Moreover, the absence of phosphatidylserine (PS) and phosphatidylethanolamine (PE) species from the most variable phospholipid species group was a discriminative feature of the T strain. This resulted from the decrease of CHO1 and increase of CHO2 levels of the T strain upon AFP treatment. These novel findings reveal that the coordinated transcription and phospholipid composition changes contribute to the increased robustness of the T strain and highlight potential metabolic engineering targets for mutants with higher tolerance.

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

4.3
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