Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24059635›Full record

ArticleMicrobial cell factories2013

In silico profiling of Escherichia coli and Saccharomyces cerevisiae as terpenoid factories.

Evamaria Gruchattka, Oliver Hädicke, Steffen Klamt, Verena Schütz, Oliver Kayser

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbial cell factories, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 96 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Marine drugs · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Microbial Production Potential ofMicroorganisms · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Rationally optimized generation of integratedSynthetic and systems biotechnology · 2021
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Engineering the oleaginous yeastBiotechnology for biofuels · 2019
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Evamaria GruchattkaTechnical Biochemistry, Department of Biochemical and Chemical Engineering, TU Dortmund University, Emil-Figge-Str, 66, 44227 Dortmund, Germany. Oliver.Kayser@bci.tu-dortmund.de.
Oliver Hädicke
Steffen Klamt
Verena Schütz
Oliver Kayser
Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems · DETU Dortmund University · DEBiomax Informatics (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHeterologous microbial production of rare plant terpenoids of medicinal or industrial interest is attracting more and more attention but terpenoid yields are still low. Escherichia coli and Saccharomyces cerevisiae are the most widely used heterologous hosts; a direct comparison of both hosts based on experimental data is difficult though. Hence, the terpenoid pathways of E. coli (via 1-deoxy-D-xylulose 5-phosphate, DXP) and S. cerevisiae (via mevalonate, MVA), the impact of the respective hosts metabolism as well as the impact of different carbon sources were compared in silico by means of elementary mode analysis. The focus was set on the yield of isopentenyl diphosphate (IPP), the general terpenoid precursor, to identify new metabolic engineering strategies for an enhanced terpenoid yield.

resultsStarting from the respective precursor metabolites of the terpenoid pathways (pyruvate and glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate for the DXP pathway and acetyl-CoA for the MVA pathway) and considering only carbon stoichiometry, the two terpenoid pathways are identical with respect to carbon yield. However, with glucose as substrate, the MVA pathway has a lower potential to supply terpenoids in high yields than the DXP pathway if the formation of the required precursors is taken into account, due to the carbon loss in the formation of acetyl-CoA. This maximum yield is further reduced in both hosts when the required energy and reduction equivalents are considered. Moreover, the choice of carbon source (glucose, xylose, ethanol or glycerol) has an effect on terpenoid yield with non-fermentable carbon sources being more promising. Both hosts have deficiencies in energy and redox equivalents for high yield terpenoid production leading to new overexpression strategies (heterologous enzymes/pathways) for an enhanced terpenoid yield. Finally, several knockout strategies are identified using constrained minimal cut sets enforcing a coupling of growth to a terpenoid yield which is higher than any yield published in scientific literature so far.

conclusionsThis study provides for the first time a comprehensive and detailed in silico comparison of the most prominent heterologous hosts E. coli and S. cerevisiae as terpenoid factories giving an overview on several promising metabolic engineering strategies paving the way for an enhanced terpenoid yield.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationEscherichia coliMetabolic EngineeringSaccharomyces cerevisiaeTerpenesTerpenes

Identifiers

PMID24059635
PMCPMC3852115
OpenAlexW2124739130

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.