Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34580743›Full record

ArticleArchives of microbiology2021

Bioprocess optimization of glutathione production by Saccharomyces boulardii: biochemical characterization of glutathione peroxidase.

Hossam Badr, Ashraf El-Baz, Ismail Mohamed, Yousseria Shetaia, Ashraf S A El-Sayed, Noha Sorour

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Probiotic YeastJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Hossam BadrDepartment of Industrial Biotechnology, Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology Research Institute, University of Sadat City, Sadat City, 22857/79, Egypt.
Ashraf El-BazDepartment of Industrial Biotechnology, Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology Research Institute, University of Sadat City, Sadat City, 22857/79, Egypt. ashrafhawase@gmail.com.
Ismail MohamedDepartment of Microbial Molecular Biology, Agricultural Genetic Engineering Research Institute (AGERI), Agricultural Research Center (ARC), Giza, Egypt.
Yousseria ShetaiaDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt. you_shetaia@hotmail.com.
Ashraf S A El-SayedBotany and Microbiology Department, Faculty of Science, Zagazig University, Zagazig, 44519, Egypt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2261-333X
Noha SorourDepartment of Industrial Biotechnology, Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology Research Institute, University of Sadat City, Sadat City, 22857/79, Egypt.
University of Sadat City · EGAgricultural Genetic Engineering Research Institute · EGAin Shams University · EGZagazig University · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The well-known probiotic GRAS Saccharomyces boulardii (CNCM I-745) was used for the first time to produce glutathione (GSH). The culture conditions affecting GSH biosynthesis were screened using a Plackett-Burman design (PBD). Analyzing the regression coefficients for 12 tested variables, yeast extract, glucose, peptone, cysteine, temperature and agitation rate had a positive significant effect on GSH production with a maximum yeild 192 mg/L. The impact of kinetics of adding cysteine was investigated in 19 experiments during the growth time course (0-36 h), and the maximum yield of glutathione (235 mg/L) was obtained by addition of cysteine after 8 h post-inoculation. The most significant variables were further explored at five levels using central composite rotatable design (CCRD), giving a maximum production of GSH (552 mg/L). Using baffled flasks, the yield of GSH was increased to 730 mg/L, i.e., 1.32-fold increment. The two rate-limiting genes of GSH biosynthesis "γ-glutamyl cysteine synthetase (GSH1) and GSH-synthetase (GSH2)" were amplified and sequenced to validate the GSH biosynthetic potency of S. boulardii. The sequences of genes showed 99% similarity with GSH1 and GSH2 genes of S. cerevisiae. Glutathione peroxidase was purified and characterized from S. boulardii with molecular mass and subunit structure of 80 kDa and 35 kDa as revealed from native and SDS-PAGE, ensuring its homodimeric identity. The activity of GPx was reduced by 2.5-fold upon demetallization confirming its metalloproteinic identity. The GPx was strongly inhibited by hydroxylamine and DTNB, ensuring the implication of surface lysine and cysteine residues on the enzyme active site domains.

Indexed as

GlutathioneSaccharomyces boulardiiGlutathione PeroxidaseGlutathione SynthaseSaccharomyces cerevisiaeGlutathioneGlutathione PeroxidaseGlutathione SynthaseGlutathioneGlutathione peroxidaseNutritional optimizationSaccharomyces boulardii

Identifiers

PMID34580743
OpenAlexW3167308054

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.