Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of the cellulose-binding domain on the catalytic activity of a β-glucosidase from Saccharomycopsis fibuligera

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology

Abstract

Enzyme engineering was performed to link the β-glucosidase enzyme (BGL1) from Saccharomycopsis fibuligera to the cellulose-binding domain (CBD2) of Trichoderma reesei cellobiohydrolase (CBHII) to investigate the effect of a fungal CBD on the enzymatic characteristics of this non-cellulolytic yeast enzyme. Recombinant enzymes were constructed with single and double copies of CBD2 fused at the N-terminus of BGL1 to mimic the two-domain organization displayed by cellulolytic enzymes in nature. The engineered S. fibuligera β-glucosidases were expressed in Saccharomyces cerevisiae under the control of phosphoglycerate-kinase-1 promoter (PGK1 P ) and terminator (PGK1 T ) and yeast mating pheromone α-factor secretion signal (MFα1 S ). The secreted enzymes were purified and characterized using a range of cellulosic and non-cellulosic substrates to illustrate the effect of the CBD on their enzymatic activity. The results indicated that the recombinant enzymes of BGL1 displayed a 2–4-fold increase in their hydrolytic activity toward cellulosic substrates like avicel, amorphous cellulose, bacterial microcrystalline cellulose, and carboxy methyl cellulose in comparison with the native enzyme. The organization of the CBD in these recombinant enzymes also resulted in enhanced substrate affinity, molecular flexibility and synergistic activity, thereby improving the ability of the enzymes to act on and hydrolyze cellulosic substrates, as characterized by adsorption, kinetics, thermal stability, and scanning electron microscopic analyses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arai T, Araki R, Tanaka A, Karita S, Kimura T, Sakka K, Ohmiya K (2003) Characterization of a cellulase containing a family 30 carbohydrate-binding module (CBM) derived from Clostridium thermocellum CelJ: importance of the CBM to cellulose hydrolysis. J Bacteriol 185:504–512

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bellstedt DU, Human PA, Rowland GF, van der Merwe KJ (1987) Acid-treated, naked bacteria as immune carriers for protein antigens. J Immunol Methods 98:249–255

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Boisset C, Fraschini C, Schulein M, Henrissat B, Chanzy H (2000) Imaging the enzymatic digestion of bacterial cellulose ribbons reveals the endo character of the cellobiohydrolase Cel6A from Humicola insolens and its mode of synergy with cellobiohydrolase Cel7A. Appl Environ Microbiol 66:1444–1452

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Gal L, Pages S, Gaudin C, Belaich A, Reverbel-Leroy C, Tardif C, Belaich JP (1997) Characterization of the cellulolytic complex (cellulosome) produced by Clostridium cellulolyticum. Appl Environ Microbiol 63:903–909

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gietz RD, Woods RA (2002) Transformation of yeast by lithium acetate/single-stranded carrier DNA/polyethylene glycol method. Methods Enzymol 350:87–96

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Gundllapalli Moses SB, Cordero Otero RR, Pretorius IS (2005) Domain engineering of Saccharomyces cerevisiae exoglucanases. Biotechnol Lett 27:355–362

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kataeva IA, Blum DL, Li XL, Ljungdahl LG (2001) Do domain interactions of glycosyl hydrolases from Clostridium thermocellum contribute to protein thermostability? Protein Eng 14:167–172

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Lehtio J, Sugiyama J, Gustavsson M, Fransson L, Linder M, Teeri TT (2003) The binding specificity and affinity determinants of family 1 and family 3 cellulose binding modules. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:484–489

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lemos MA, Teixeira JA, Domingues MRM, Mota M, Gama FM (2003) The enhancement of the cellulolytic activity of cellobiohydrolase I and endoglucanase by the addition of cellulose binding domains derived from Trichoderma reesei. Enzyme Microb Technol 32:35–40

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lönn A, Gardonyi M, van Zyl W, Hahn Hagerdahl B, Cordero Otero R (2002) Cold adaptation of xylose isomerase from Thermus thermophilus through random PCR mutagenesis. Gene cloning and protein characterization. Eur J Biochem 269:157–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lymar ES, Li B, Renganathan V (1995) Purification and characterization of a cellulose-binding β-glucosidase from cellulose-degrading cultures of Phanerochaete chrysosporium. Appl Environ Microbiol 61:2976–2980

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Machida M, Ohtsuki I, Fukui S, Yamashita I (1988) Nucleotide sequences of Saccharomycopsis fibuligera genes for extracellular β-glucosidases as expressed in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl Environ Microbiol 54:3147–3155

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Mangala SL, Kittur FS, Nishimoto M, Sakka K, Ohmiya K, Kitaoka M, Hayashi K (2003) Fusion of family VI cellulose binding domains to Bacillus halodurans xylanase increases its catalytic activity and substrate-binding capacity to insoluble xylan. J Mol Catal B Enzym 21:221–230

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Nidetzky B, Steiner W, Hayn M, Claeyssens M (1994) Cellulose hydrolysis by the cellulolytic enzymes from Trichoderma reesei: a new model for synergistic interaction. Biochem J 298:705–710

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Reinikainen T, Ruohonen L, Nevanen T, Laaksonen L, Kraulis P, Jones TA, Knowles JK, Teeri TT (1992) Investigation of the function of mutated cellulose-binding domains of Trichoderma reesei cellobiohydrolase I. Proteins 14:475–482

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Stahlberg J, Johansson G, Pettersson G (1991) A new model for enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose based on the two-domain structure of cellobiohydrolase I. Biotechnology 9:286–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Suzuki K, Yabe T, Maruyama Y, Abe K, Nakajima T (2001) Characterization of recombinant yeast exo-beta-1,3-glucanase (Exg1p) expressed in Escherichia coli cells. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 65:1310–1314

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Teeri TT, Reinikainen T, Ruohonen L, Jones TA, Knowles JKC (1992) Domain function in Trichoderma reesei cellobiohydrolase. J Biotechnol 24:169–176

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Tomme P, Warren RAJ, Miller RC Jr, Kilburn DG, Gilkers NR (1995) Cellulose-binding domains: classification and properties. In: Saddler JN, Pennaer MH (eds) Enzymatic degradation of insoluble carbohydrates. ACS Symposium Series No. 618. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, pp 142–163

    Google Scholar 

  20. Tormo J, Lamed R, Chirino AJ, Morag E, Bayer EA, Shoham Y, Steitz TA (1996) Crystal structure of a bacterial family-III cellulose-binding domain: a general mechanism for attachment to cellulose. EMBO J 15:5739–5751

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Towbin H, Staehelin T, Gordon J (1979) Electrophoretic transfer of proteins from polyacrylamide gels to nitrocellulose sheets: procedure and some applications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 76:4350–4354

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Van Rensburg P, van Zyl WH, Pretorius IS (1996) Co-expression of a Phanerochaete chrysosporium cellobiohydrolase gene and a Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens endo-β-1,4-glucanase gene in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Curr Genet 30:246–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This project was financially supported by South Africa’’ grapegrowers and winemakers through their investment body Winetech, and by South Africa’s National Research Foundation. The authors would like to thank Dr. P. Van Rensburg, IWBT, for kindly providing the plasmid pEFB19; Mr. J. Minaar of the analytical facility (Institute for Wine Biotechnology, Stellenbosch University) for the HPLC analyses; and Ms. M. Waldron of the Electron Microscope Facility at the University of Cape Town, South Africa, for SEM analyses.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Wine Biotechnology, Department of Viticulture and Oenology, Stellenbosch University, Victoria Street, Stellenbosch, ZA, 7602, South Africa

    Sarath B. Gundllapalli, Isak S. Pretorius & Ricardo R. Cordero Otero

  2. The Australian Wine Research Institute, Waite Road, Urrbrae, Adelaide, SA, 5064, Australia

    Isak S. Pretorius

  3. Department of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, University of Rovira i Virgili, Marcel·lí Domingo Street, 43007, Tarragona, Spain

    Ricardo R. Cordero Otero

Authors
  1. Sarath B. Gundllapalli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Isak S. Pretorius
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ricardo R. Cordero Otero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ricardo R. Cordero Otero.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gundllapalli, S.B., Pretorius, I.S. & Cordero Otero, R.R. Effect of the cellulose-binding domain on the catalytic activity of a β-glucosidase from Saccharomycopsis fibuligera . J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 34, 413–421 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10295-007-0213-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10295-007-0213-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation