4.7 Review

The Engineering, Expression, and Immobilization of Epimerases for D-allulose Production

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms241612703

关键词

Bacillus subtilis; biomanufacturing; D-allulose; Escherichia coli; metal nanoparticle; protein engineering; rare sugar; sweeteners

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review discusses the potential use of three newly identified D-allulose 3-epimerases for the industrial-scale manufacturing of D-allulose. It also highlights other methods to enhance the process efficiency, such as improving the thermotolerance and acid resistance of D-allulose enzymes, utilizing Bacillus subtilis for the biosynthesis of D-allulose, and immobilizing D-allulose enzymes to enhance their activity, half-life, and stability. These research advancements have led to increased yields of D-allulose, bridging the gap between small-scale production and industrial-scale manufacturing.
The rare sugar D-allulose is a potential replacement for sucrose with a wide range of health benefits. Conventional production involves the employment of the Izumoring strategy, which utilises D-allulose 3-epimerase (DAEase) or D-psicose 3-epimerase (DPEase) to convert D-fructose into D-allulose. Additionally, the process can also utilise D-tagatose 3-epimerase (DTEase). However, the process is not efficient due to the poor thermotolerance of the enzymes and low conversion rates between the sugars. This review describes three newly identified DAEases that possess desirable properties for the industrial-scale manufacturing of D-allulose. Other methods used to enhance process efficiency include the engineering of DAEases for improved thermotolerance or acid resistance, the utilization of Bacillus subtilis for the biosynthesis of D-allulose, and the immobilization of DAEases to enhance its activity, half-life, and stability. All these research advancements improve the yield of D-allulose, hence closing the gap between the small-scale production and industrial-scale manufacturing of D-allulose.

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