4.7 Article

Enhancing the thermostability of Rhizopus chinensis lipase by rational design and MD simulations

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.05.243

关键词

Rhizopus chinensis lipase; Thermostability; Rational design; Molecular dynamics simulations

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31671799]
  2. Six Talent Peaks Project in Jiangsu Province [NY-010]
  3. National First-Class Discipline Program of Light Industry Technology and Engineering [LITE2018-09]
  4. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (863 Program) [2012AA022207]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To improve the thermostability of r27RCL from Rhizopus chinensis and broaden its industrial applications, we used rational design (FoldX) according to Delta Delta G calculation to predict mutations. Four thermostable variants S142A, D217V, Q239F, and S250Y were screened out and then combined together to generate a quadruple-mutation (5142A/D217V/Q239F/S250Y) variant, called m31. m31 exhibited enhanced thermostability with a 41.7-fold longer half-life at 60 degrees C, a 5 degrees C higher of t(opt), and 15.8 degrees C higher of T-50(30) compared to that of r27RCL expressed in Pichia pastoris. Molecular dynamics simulations were conducted to analyze the mechanism of the thermostable mutant. The results indicated that the rigidity of m31 was improved due to the decreased solvent accessible surface area, a newly formed salt bridge of Glu292:His171, and the increased Delta Delta G of m31. According to the root-mean-square-fluctuation analysis, three positive mutations S142A, D217V, and Q239F located in the thermal weak regions and greatly decreased the distribution of thermal-fluctuated regions of m31, compared to that of r27RCL. These results suggested that to simultaneously implement MD simulations and Delta Delta G-based rational approaches will be more accurate and efficient for the improvement of enzyme thermostability. (C) 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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