4.7 Article

Engineering synthetic bacterial consortia for enhanced desulfurization and revalorization of oil sulfur compounds

期刊

METABOLIC ENGINEERING
卷 35, 期 -, 页码 46-54

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ymben.2016.01.005

关键词

Dibenzothiophene; 2-hydroxybiphenyll dsz cassettes; Pseudomonas putida; Synthetic bacterial consortia

资金

  1. Saudi Aramco
  2. [DBR-001/08/WCOD]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The 4S pathway is the most studied bioprocess for the removal of the recalcitrant sulfur of aromatic heterocycles present in fuels. It consists of three sequential functional units, encoded by the dszABCD genes, through which the model compound dibenzothiophene (DBT) is transformed into the sulfur-free 2-hydroxybiphenyl (2HBP) molecule. In this work, a set of synthetic dsz cassettes were implanted in Pseudomonas putida KT2440, a model bacterial chassis for metabolic engineering studies. The complete dszB1A1C1-D1 cassette behaved as an attractive alternative to the previously constructed recombinant dsz cassettes for the conversion of DBT into 2HBP. Refactoring the 4S pathway by the use of synthetic dsz modules encoding individual 4S pathway reactions revealed unanticipated traits, e.g., the 4S intermediate 2HBP-sulfinate (HBPS) behaves as an inhibitor of the Dsz monooxygenases, and once secreted from the cells it cannot be further taken up. That issue should be addressed for the rational design of more efficient biocatalysts for DBT bioconversions. In this sense, the construction of synthetic bacterial consortia to compartmentalize the 4S pathway into different cell factories for individual optimization was shown to enhance the conversion of DBT into 2HBP, overcome the inhibition of the Dsz enzymes by the 4S intermediates, and enable efficient production of unattainable high added value intermediates, e.g., HBPS, that are difficult to obtain using the current monocultures. (C) 2016 International Metabolic Engineering Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. 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