4.4 Article

In-silico determination of Pichia pastoris signal peptides for extracellular recombinant protein production

期刊

JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY
卷 364, 期 -, 页码 179-188

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2014.08.048

关键词

In-silico; Signal peptide; Pichia pastoris; Secretion mechanism; Protein

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In-silico identified novel secretory signal peptides (SPs) are required in vivo to achieve efficient transfer or to prevent other cellular proteins from interfering with the process in extracellular recombinant protein (r-protein) production. 56 endogenous and exogenous secretory SPs, have been used or having the potential to be used in Pichia pastoris for r-protein secretion, were analyzed in-silico using the softwares namely SignalP4.1, Phobius, WolfPsort0.2, ProP1.0, and NetNGlyc1.0. Among the predicted 41 endogenous secretory SPs, five of them have been used in P. pastoris, and regarded as positive controls; whereas, 36 of them have not been used. Amongst, the predicted cleavage site for each of the 32 endogenous secretory SPs was found to be same by the three programs. The secretory SPs having the highest D-scores, the score quantifying the signal peptide-ness of a given sequence segment, were: MKILSALLLLFTLAFA (D=0.932), MRPVLSLLLLLASSVLA (D=0.932), MFKSLCMLIGSCLLSSVLA (D=0.918). As D-scores of these SPs are higher than that of Saccharomyces cerevisiae a-mating factor signal peptide which has been widely used for r-protein production, they can be considered as the promising candidates. Among the predicted 15 exogenous SPs, 11 have been used in P. pastoris: therefore, they were evaluated as positive controls. The three programs predicted a unique cleavage site for each of the 10 exogenous SPs; and D-scores of these SPs were within D=0.805-0.900; whereas, four exogenous secretory SPs, which have not been used in P. pastoris, have D-scores within D=0.494-0.702. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.4
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