4.8 Article

Increasing Redox Potential, Redox Mediator Activity, and Stability in a Fungal Laccase by Computer-Guided Mutagenesis and Directed Evolution

期刊

ACS CATALYSIS
卷 9, 期 5, 页码 4561-4572

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acscatal.9b00531

关键词

laccase; redox potential; redox mediator; stability; directed evolution; computer-aided design

资金

  1. European Union [Bioenergy-FP7-PEOPLE-2013-ITN-607793]
  2. COST Action [CM1303]
  3. Swedish Energy Agency [44707-1]
  4. Knowledge Foundation [20170168]
  5. Spanish Government [CTQ2016-79138-R, BIO2016-79106-R-Lignolution]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fungal high-redox-potential laccases (HRPLs) are multi-copper oxidases with a relaxed substrate specificity that is highly dependent on their binding affinity and redox potential of the T1Cu site (E-T1). In this study, we combined computational design with directed evolution to tailor an HRPL variant with increased E-T1 and activity toward high-redox-potential mediators as well as enhanced stability. Laccase mutant libraries were screened in vitro using synthetic highredox-potential mediators with different oxidation routes and chemical natures, while computer-aided evolution experiments were run in parallel to guide benchtop mutagenesis, without compromising protein stability. Through this strategy, the E-T1 of the evolved HRPL increased from 740 to 790 mV, with a concomitant improvement in thermal and acidic pH stability. The kinetic constants for high-redox-potential mediators were markedly improved and were then successfully tested within laccase systems (LMSs). Two hydrophobic substitutions surrounding the T1Cu site appeared to underlie these effects, and they were rationalized at the atomic level. Together, this study represents a proof-of-concept of the joint elevation of the E-T1, redox mediator activity, and stability in an HRPL, making this versatile biocatalyst a promising candidate for future LMS applications and for the development of bioelectrochemical devices.

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

4.8
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