ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
Core Catalysis of the Reductive Glycine Pathway Demonstrated in Yeast
My Activity
  • Open Access
Letter

Core Catalysis of the Reductive Glycine Pathway Demonstrated in Yeast
Click to copy article linkArticle link copied!

Open PDFSupporting Information (1)

ACS Synthetic Biology

Cite this: ACS Synth. Biol. 2019, 8, 5, 911–917
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.8b00464
Published April 19, 2019

Copyright © 2019 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under CC-BY.

Abstract

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

One-carbon (C1) compounds are attractive microbial feedstocks as they can be efficiently produced from widely available resources. Formate, in particular, represents a promising growth substrate, as it can be generated from electrochemical reduction of CO2 and fed to microorganisms in a soluble form. We previously identified the synthetic reductive glycine pathway as the most efficient route for aerobic growth on formate. We further demonstrated pathway activity in Escherichia coli after expression of both native and foreign genes. Here, we explore whether the reductive glycine pathway could be established in a model microorganism using only native enzymes. We used the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae as host and show that overexpression of only endogenous enzymes enables glycine biosynthesis from formate and CO2 in a strain that is otherwise auxotrophic for glycine. We find the pathway to be highly active in this host, where 0.125 mM formate is sufficient to support growth. Notably, the formate-dependent growth rate of the engineered S. cerevisiae strain remained roughly constant over a very wide range of formate concentrations, 1–500 mM, indicating both high affinity for formate use and high tolerance toward elevated concentration of this C1 feedstock. Our results, as well the availability of endogenous NAD-dependent formate dehydrogenase, indicate that yeast might be an especially suitable host for engineering growth on formate.

Copyright © 2019 American Chemical Society
Reduced one-carbon (C1) compounds are abundant in natural habitats (e.g., methanol in phyllosphere, the aerial parts of plants (1)) and prevalent as byproducts of industrial processes (e.g., carbon monoxide in the flue gas of the steel industry (2)). As C1 compounds can also be produced abiotically in an efficient and cost-effective manner—for example, formate from electrochemical reduction of CO2 (3,4)—they could potentially serve as ideal feedstocks for sustainable microbial growth and bioproduction, (5−7) alleviating the problems associated with sugar feedstocks, the use of which erodes food security and biodiversity. (8)
Yet, biological assimilation of C1 compounds is limited to a small number of metabolic pathways and specialized microbial lineages. (9−11) Synthetic biology can prove useful by offering tailor-made solutions that can surpass natural alternatives. (12) In previous studies, we put forward the reductive glycine pathway as the most efficient route for aerobic growth on formate. (7,11,13) In this pathway, formate is first attached to tetrahydrofolate (THF)—the universal C1 carrier—and then reduced to methylene-THF. The glycine cleavage/synthase system (GCS) then condenses the C1-moiety of methylene-THF with CO2 and ammonia to give glycine. Glycine can be further metabolized to biomass and chemical products, e.g., by further condensation with the C1-moiety of methylene-THF to give serine that is deaminated to pyruvate. (11)
Only a small group of anaerobic purine- and amino-acid-degrading microbes are thought to produce glycine from one carbon units. (14,15) In a recently published paper, we demonstrated that the reductive activities of the THF enzymes and GCS can support the net biosynthesis of C2 and C3 compounds from formate and CO2 in E. coli. (16) Yet, as E. coli does not harbor an NAD-dependent formate dehydrogenase (FDH)—which is vital for using formate to supply the cell with reducing power and energy—it might not be an ideal host. Furthermore, the activity of the reductive glycine pathway in Escherichia coli was possible only via overexpression of foreign enzymes (from Methylobacterium extorquens). As the enzymatic components of the reductive glycine pathway are prevalent throughout the tree of life, we wondered whether the pathway could be established using only endogenous enzymes of a model host microbe that also naturally harbors NAD-dependent FDH. This would support the premise that C1 assimilation via the reductive glycine pathway could be a “latent” metabolic capability shared by multiple microorganisms, which could be induced by overexpression of naturally occurring components.
We decided to focus on the model yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae since it endogenously harbors NAD-dependent FDH as well as all the enzymatic components of the reductive glycine pathway. Furthermore, the GCS of yeast was previously demonstrated to be reversible, such that feeding with 13C-formate resulted in detection of labeled glycine. (17,18) However, net production of glycine from formate and CO2 (Figure 1A)—as to indicate the possibility to support growth on C1 compounds—was never demonstrated in any eukaryotic organism. Here, we show the biosynthesis of glycine in a eukaryotic host solelyvia the reductive glycine pathway upon overexpression of native enzymes. We further demonstrate that yeast can sustain a constant growth rate across almost 3 orders of magnitude of formate concentrations, making it an especially promising host to support the assimilation of this key C1 compound.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Reductive glycine pathway and a selection scheme for its activity in yeast. (A) The “metabolic engine” of the reductive glycine pathway: condensation of C1-moieties into the C2 compound glycine. Substructure of tetrahydrofolate (THF) is shown in brown. Lipoic acid attached to the H-protein of the glycine cleavage/synthase system (GCS) is shown in green. (B) Gene deletions (marked in red) required for the construction of a glycine auxotroph strain, which we used to select for glycine biosynthesis from the activity of the reductive glycine pathway; pathway enzymes are shown in green.

Results

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

We started with a glycine auxotroph strain—schematically shown in Figure 1B—deleted in the mitochondrial and cytosolic isozymes of serine hydroxymethyltransferase (ΔSHM1 ΔSHM2), as well as in threonine aldolase (ΔGLY1) and alanine:glyoxylate aminotransferase (ΔAGX1). (19) This metabolic background was used to select for the biosynthesis of glycine from formate and CO2. We cultivated the strain under high concentrations of formate (100 mM), CO2 (10%), and ammonia (100 mM), in order to kinetically and thermodynamically push the mitochondrial MIS1 enzyme (trifunctional formyl-THF synthetase, methenyl-THF cyclohydrolase, and methylene-THF dehydrogenase (20)) and the GCS in the reductive direction. Still, we were unable to establish growth without adding glycine to the medium. This indicated that the endogenous activities of MIS1, the GCS, or both are too low to support the required flux.
Next, we used the recently developed AssemblX method (21) to construct plasmids overexpressing the native MIS1 gene (pJGC1), the genes of the GCS (pJGC2), or both (pJGC3). As shown in Figure 2, each gene was regulated by a (different) strong constitutive yeast promoter to ensure high expression levels. These plasmids were transformed into the glycine auxotroph strain. The transformed strains were then cultivated in the presence of formate and high CO2. Growth of the strains harboring pJGC1 or pJGC2 was not observed without glycine supplement, regardless of the concentrations of formate and CO2. However, the strain harboring pJGC3—expressing both MIS1 and the genes of the GCS—was able to grow with formate substituting for glycine in the medium. This growth was dependent on elevated CO2 concentration (10% CO2) that is needed both thermodynamically, pushing the reversible GCS in the reductive direction, and kinetically, due to the relatively low affinity toward inorganic carbon. (22,23)

Figure 2

Figure 2. Three plasmids harboring genes encoding for different subsets of the enzymes of the reductive glycine pathway. pJGC1 harbors only the gene that encodes for MIS1, a trifunctional enzyme that converts formate to methylene-THF. pJGC2 harbors the genes encoding for the subunits of the GCS (the gene encoding for dihydrolipoamide dehydrogenase, LPD1, was not overexpressed since we reasoned its native expression would suffice as it participates in other complexes in the mitochondria, i.e., pyruvate dehydrogenase and 2-ketoglutarate dehydrogenase). pJGC3 harbors the genes encoding for MIS1 and the enzymes of the GCS. Each gene was regulated by a different strong, constitutive promoter as shown in the figure. Each plasmid was based on the pL1A-lc vector backbone as explained in the Methods section.

As shown in Figure 3A and B, formate concentrations below 1 mM sufficed to support growth of the glycine auxotroph strain. Maximal growth rate (or close to it) was observed with 1 mM formate and remained nearly constant up to 500 mM formate. At 750 mM formate, growth was severally inhibited, and at 1000 mM formate, no growth was observed. As formate is added as sodium salt, inhibition at concentrations above 500 mM might be attributed to the accumulation of sodium ions. However, while we did observe growth inhibition with NaCl concentrations above 500 mM, the growth inhibition associated with >500 mM sodium formate was considerably more severe. This indicates that at these high concentrations, formate becomes toxic to yeast.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Formate-dependent growth. (A) Growth of the glycine auxotroph strain harboring the pJGC3 plasmid using different concentrations of formate, 2% glucose and 10% CO2. “No OE” refers to the negative control, i.e., a glycine auxotroph strain without a plasmid, while “No OE + glycine” refers to the positive control, i.e., a glycine auxotroph strain without a plasmid where glycine was added to the medium. Each curve represents the average of three replicates, which were not different by more than 10%. Growth curves were cut after reaching stationary phase. (B) Calculated growth rate as a function of formate concentration. Growth rate increases with increasing formate concentration up to 1 mM, remains rather stable up to 500 mM, and then sharply decreases with higher concentrations. .

To confirm that glycine is indeed produced solely via the reductive activity of MIS1 and the GCS, we conducted several carbon labeling experiments providing (i) 13C-formate and unlabeled CO2, (ii) 13C-CO2 and unlabeled formate, or (iii) 13C-formate and 13C-CO2. As shown in Figure 4, the results match the expected labeling:

Figure 4

Figure 4. 13C-labeling experiments confirm glycine production from formate. Fraction of labeling of different amino acids in different strains and labeled feedstocks is shown. “G” corresponds to glycine, “S” to serine, “A” to alanine, “M” to methionine, and “T” to threonine. Complete labeling of glycine in the glycine auxotroph strain harboring pJGC3 upon feeding with 13C-formate confirms that glycine biosynthesis occurs only via the reductive glycine pathway. Partial labeling of glycine with 13C-CO2 is attributed to the high production rate of unlabeled CO2 in the mitochondria. See main text for a detailed discussion on the labeling pattern of these amino acids.

Threonine was partially labeled when 13C-CO2 was used, as it is derived from carbon-fixing anaplerosis. The structure of methionine corresponds to that of threonine with the addition of a carbon that originates from methyl-THF. The difference between the labeling of methionine and threonine thus represents the labeling of cytoplasmatic C1 units carried by THF. As shown by the labeling pattern observed upon feeding a WT strain with 13C-formate, this C1 moiety is only partially derived from formate, where the rest originates from serine cleavage. On the other hand, in the glycine auxotroph strain, in which serine hydroxymethyltransferase (SHM1, SHM2) is deleted, all cytoplasmic C1 units originate from formate.
Upon feeding with 13C-formate, alomst all glycine was singly labeled in the glycine auxotroph strain expressing MIS1 and genes of the GCS. This confirms the activity of the reductive glycine pathway where glycine is derived from formate. When feeding with 13C-CO2, glycine was only partially labeled, which can be attributed to the high production rate of unlabeled CO2 by mitochondrial pyruvate oxidation as well as acetyl-CoA oxidation via the TCA cycle. Serine was partially labeled in the WT strain upon feeding with 13C-formate, indicating substantial reductive flux of formate toward methylene-THF and the beta-carbon of serine. This labeling was obviously absent in the glycine auxotroph strain in which serine hydroxymethyltransferase is deleted. As a control, we confirmed that alanine was always unlabeled.

Discussion

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

The results presented here confirm that the “metabolic engine” of the reductive glycine pathway—net production of the C2 compound glycine from the C1 moieties formate and CO2—can be established within a model microbe using only native enzymes. While this activity was made possible only via overexpression of the necessary endogenous genes (using strong endogenous promoters), once established, it was able to support formate utilization with high affinity, as indicated by the fact that 0.125 mM formate sufficed to support growth. Interestingly, growth rate showed little change with formate concentration varying between 1 and 500 mM. This suggests that, beyond the high efficiency of the reductive glycine pathway, yeast is highly tolerant to formate, a compound that is known to inhibit the growth of other microorganisms at a much lower concentration. (24,25) Specifically, many bacteria show severe growth impairment at formate concentrations higher than 100 mM. (26) Yeast high tolerance toward formate is in line with previous reports that formate can serve as an auxiliary substrate enhancing growth by providing further reducing power via the endogenous activity of FDH. (27,28)
Since yeast, as well as many other microorganisms, harbors all the enzymes of the reductive glycine pathway, it is tempting to ask why it cannot support net glycine biosynthesis from formate without the need for gene overexpression. One possible answer is that formate—while being a metabolic intermediate transferred between organelles in eukaryotic organisms (29)—is not a common compound found in the native habitat of this microorganism. Hence, cells were not adapted to incorporate it efficiently. Another barrier relates to the high concentration of CO2 required to thermodynamically and kinetically support pathway activity—a condition that might not be frequently met in the relevant natural environment.
Luckily, sustaining high CO2 concentration is quite straightforward within a biotechnological context, as is the case in multiple fermentation processes, for example, autotrophic cultivation of acetogens. (9) Moreover, in the ultimate yeast strain growing on formate, the oxidation of this compound to CO2 (to provide the cell with reducing power and energy) is expected to surpass CO2 assimilation. Hence, maintaining high CO2 concentration within the bioreactor would be rather straightforward and at most would require the recycling of CO2 from the bioreactor outflow.
In the current study, the dependence of cellular growth on formate is rather low, where only the biosynthesis of glycine and the cellular C1-units requires this C1 feedstock. Confirming this, we did not observe any significant decrease in the concentration of formate in the medium when cultivating our strain for 30 h and up to an OD ∼ 2 (with a starting concentration of 10 mM, see Methods). We speculate, however, that once formate will become a sole carbon source for growth, its consumption rate will become significant.
To conclude, we demonstrate the net production of glycine in a eukaryotic organism. Our findings suggest that S. cerevisiae can become an ideal host for the reductive glycine pathway as it harbors a highly efficient NAD-dependent FDH, requires overexpression of only endogenous enzymes, and supports a rather constant growth rate across ∼3 orders of magnitude of formate concentration. It remains for future studies to engineer the downstream assimilation of glycine to biomass, presumably also via native enzymes, e.g., serine hydroxymethyltransferase and serine deaminase. Beyond yeast, this study suggests that the activity of the reductive glycine pathway might be a “latent” metabolic trait in many microorganisms that endogenously harbor all pathway components, requiring only change in gene expression to support formate assimilation. A recent study that indicates the endogenous activity of the pathway supports this premise. (30)

Methods

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Reagents

PCR reactions were done with PrimeSTAR GXL polymerase (BD Clontech GmbH, Heidelberg, Germany) or Phusion High-Fidelity polymerase (Thermo Fisher Scientific GmbH, Dreieich, Germany), following the manufacturer’s recommendations. All primers were synthesized by Eurofins Genomics GmbH (Ebersberg, Germany). All media and media supplements were ordered from Sigma-Aldrich Chemie GmbH (Munich, Germany). Glucose was ordered from Carl Roth GmbH + Co. KG (Karlsruhe, Germany).

Yeast Strains, Media, and Cultivation

The following Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains were used: YUW1 (MATa ura3-1 trp-1 ade2-1 his3-11-15 leu2-3-112 can1-100 shm1::HIS3 shm2::LEU2 glyΔ0 AGX1::KanMX4), (19) and BY4741 (MATa his3Δ1 leu2Δ0 met15Δ0 ura3Δ0). (31) The BY4741 strain was used for in vivo assembly of Level 0 constructs, (21) and the glycine auxotroph strain YUW1 was used for in vivo assembly of the final Level 1 multigene plasmids (21) and as genetic background for all growth experiments described in the main text.
We used a “semirich” synthetic complete (SC) medium (2% w/v glucose, 0.67% w/v yeast nitrogen base without amino acids, and 0.14% w/v of the appropriate amino acid drop-out mix) to select yeast strains harboring the multigene construct after transformation. Synthetic minimal (SM) medium (2% glucose, 0.67% yeast nitrogen base without amino acids and without ammonium sulfate, 100 mM ammonium sulfate, and 0–1000 mM sodium formate) supplemented with tryptophan and adenine (each 0.0076% w/v) was used to test the YUW1 strain carrying plasmid pJGC1, pJGC2, or pJGC3, for its ability to synthesize glycine from formate and CO2. Additional glycine and/or uracil (0.0076% w/v each) were added to test growth of the YUW1 parental strain, not harboring any plasmid. YPAD medium (2% w/v peptone, 1% w/v yeast extract, 2% w/v glucose, and 0.004% w/v of adenine hemisulfate) was used for yeast recovery during the transformation procedure and for propagation of yeast strains requiring no selection, e.g., plasmid free YUW1 and BY4741.
Yeast liquid cultures were cultivated under shaking at 220 rpm and 30 °C. Different CO2 concentrations (atmospheric or 10%) were used as indicated along with each experiment. Agar plates were prepared using liquid media supplemented with 2% w/v agar and incubated at 30 °C at the indicated CO2 concentration.

Plasmid and Genomic DNA Extraction from Yeast

For PCR amplification of yeast genes, genomic DNA was extracted using the SDS/lithium acetate method. (32) In brief, a small amount of a colony was transferred into an SDS/LiAc solution (1% w/v SDS, 200 mM LiAc), incubated for 15 min at 70 °C, and pelleted by centrifugation (21 000g, 2 min). The pellet was subsequently washed with 70% ethanol, dried and resuspended in 10 μL TE buffer. Plasmids from yeast colonies were extracted with the ChargeSwitch Plasmid Yeast Mini Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific GmbH).

Growth Conditions and Determination of Growth Rate

Growth experiments were performed using a TECAN SPARK 10 M plate reader (Tecan Deutschland GmbH, Crailsheim, Germany) at 30 °C and different CO2 concentrations (atmospheric or 10%, as indicated in the main text). A cycle with 12 individual 60 s shaking steps was programmed with the steps alternating between linear and orbital shaking (2 mm amplitude). To determine the growth rate of yeast cultures, their optical density (OD) at 600 nm was measured immediately after each shaking cycle throughout the complete growth experiment. Growth rate and doubling time were calculated using a custom MATLAB script. Raw data from the plate reader were calibrated to cuvette values according to ODcuvette = ODplate × 3.3. Growth curves were plotted in MATLAB and represent averages of triplicate measurements; in all cases, variability between triplicate measurements was less than 5%.

Yeast Transformation

For plasmid transformation, yeast cells were transformed using the lithium acetate/single-stranded carrier (LiAc/SS) method as described in ref (33). We used 100 ng of each DNA fragment or plasmid to be transformed. For strain YUW1, the cells were heat-shocked at 42 °C for 30 min, recovered in YPDA medium for 4 h at 30 °C, and then plated on appropriate selective SC medium. BY4741 cells were heat-shocked for 40 min at 42 °C and directly plated on appropriate selective SC media without recovery step.

Plasmid Construction

In order to create the different multigene expression plasmids for the enzymes involved in the reductive glycine pathway, we used the AssemblX cloning toolkit, which offers a modular way to create multigene plasmids using a level-based strategy. (21)
To generate Level 0 constructs (see Supplementary Table S1), all necessary promoters and terminators were PCR-amplified from the AssemblX promoter library, while all CDS that participate in the pathway (GCV1–3, LPD1, and MIS1) were amplified directly from the BY4741 yeast genome. All primers used were designed with the AssemblX webtool or the J5 software (34) and contained additional 5′ sequences allowing for homology-directed assemblies. For the list of primers see Supplementary Table S2. For in vivo assembly in yeast BY4741, purified PCR fragments (100 ng per fragment) were mixed with appropriate Level 0 backbone plasmid (linearized with HindIII) according to the assembly protocol—generated by the webtools mentioned above—and transformed into yeast.
Transformants were selected on solid SC medium without uracil and analyzed by colony PCR. Plasmids from potential positive colonies were extracted from yeast with the ChargeSwitch Plasmid Yeast Mini Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific GmbH), retransformed into E. coli, isolated, and sent for sequencing.
For construction of the final multigene Level 1 plasmids, the Level 0 modules created above were released from their backbones by restriction digestion, according to the AssemblX protocol. During this process, proprietary homology regions, present in the Level 0 backbones, are released along with the previously assembled Level 0 module. These regions overlap between neighboring Level 0 modules and thus allow ordered assembly by in vivo recombination. Following gel purification all Level 0 modules belonging to one intended multigene construct were mixed together with the linearized Level 1 backbone pL1A-lc and transformed directly into yeast YUW1 to allow in vivo assembly.
Selection for successfully assembled plasmids was done on solid SC medium without uracil. Verification of correctly assembled plasmids was done as described above, whereby only the junctions between individual assembly parts were sequenced.

Carbon Labeling

Cells were grown in 3 mL SM media supplemented with adenine, tryptophane and labeled or unlabeled formate (250 mM) in the presence of 10% labeled or unlabeled CO2. After reaching stationary phase, ∼109 cells were harvested by centrifugation for 1 min at 11 500g. The biomass was hydrolyzed by incubation with 1 mL 6 N hydrochloric acid for 24 h at 95 °C. The acid was then evaporated by continued heating at 95 °C and nitrogen streaming. Hydrolyzed amino acids were separated using ultraperformance liquid chromatography (Acquity UPLC, Waters GmbH, Eschborn, Germany) with a C18-reversed-phase column (Waters GmbH). Mass spectra were acquired using an Exactive mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific GmbH). Data analysis was performed using Xcalibur software (Thermo Fisher Scientific GmbH). Prior to analysis, amino-acid standards (Sigma-Aldrich Chemie GmbH) were analyzed under the same conditions to determine typical retention times.

Determination of Formate Concentration in Media

The glycine auxotroph strain carrying the pJGC3 plasmid was inoculated, in duplicates, at an OD600 of 0.03 in synthetic minimal medium with 10 mM formate. A sample of the growth medium was taken from each duplicate every ∼2 h during a 34-h fermentation (reaching on OD600 of ∼2). Each sample was centrifuged twice and diluted 1:1000. 500 μL of each diluted sample run in high-performance anion- and cation-exchange chromatography with conductivity detection facilitated by a Dionex ICS-3000 system (Thermo Fisher Scientific GmbH, Dreieich, Germany) with the columns IonPac AS11 Analytical Column 2 × 250 mm (Dionex) and IonPac AG11 Guard Column 2 × 50 mm (Dionex).

Supporting Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.8b00464.

  • Table S1: Genetic constructs used in this study; Table S2: DNA primers used in this study (PDF)

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Author Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

  • Corresponding Author
  • Authors
    • Jorge Gonzalez de la Cruz - Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam, Germany
    • Fabian Machens - Department Molecular Biology, University of Potsdam, Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 24/25, 14476 Potsdam, GermanyOrcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0001-6039-3860
    • Katrin Messerschmidt - University of Potsdam, Cell2Fab Research Unit, Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 24/25, 14476 Potsdam, Germany
  • Notes
    The authors declare the following competing financial interest(s): A.B.E. is co-founder of b.fab, aiming to commercialize C1 assimilation. The company was not involved in any way in the conducting, funding, or influencing the research.

Acknowledgments

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

The authors thank Charlie Cotton and Hai He for critical reading of the manuscript. This work was funded by the Max Planck Society.

References

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This article references 34 other publications.

  1. 1
    Vorholt, J. A. (2012) Microbial life in the phyllosphere. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 10, 828840,  DOI: 10.1038/nrmicro2910
  2. 2
    Abubackar, H. N., eiga, M. C., and Kennes, C. (2011) Biological conversion of carbon monoxide: rich syngas or waste gases to bioethanol. Biofuels, Bioprod. Biorefin. 5, 93114,  DOI: 10.1002/bbb.256
  3. 3
    Kopljar, D., Inan, A., Vindayer, P., Wagner, N., and Klemm, E. (2014) Electrochemical reduction of CO2 to formate at high current density using gas diffusion electrodes. J. Appl. Electrochem. 44, 11071116,  DOI: 10.1007/s10800-014-0731-x
  4. 4
    Yang, H., Kaczur, J. J., Sajjad, S. D., and Masel, R. I. (2017) Electrochemical conversion of CO2 to formic acid utilizing Sustainion membranes. Journal of CO2 Utilization 20, 208217,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jcou.2017.04.011
  5. 5
    Bennett, R. K., Steinberg, L. M., Chen, W., and Papoutsakis, E. T. (2018) Engineering the bioconversion of methane and methanol to fuels and chemicals in native and synthetic methylotrophs. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 50, 8193,  DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2017.11.010
  6. 6
    Bengelsdorf, F. R. and Durre, P. (2017) Gas fermentation for commodity chemicals and fuels. Microb. Biotechnol. 10, 11671170,  DOI: 10.1111/1751-7915.12763
  7. 7
    Yishai, O., Lindner, S. N., Gonzalez de la Cruz, J., Tenenboim, H., and Bar-Even, A. (2016) The formate bio-economy. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 35, 19,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2016.07.005
  8. 8
    Naik, S. N., Goud, V. V., Rout, P. K., and Dalai, A. K. (2010) Production of first and second generation biofuels: a comprehensive review. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 14, 578597,  DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2009.10.003
  9. 9
    Drake, H. L., Küsel, K., and Matthies, C. (2013) Acetogenic prokaryotes, In The Prokaryotes, pp 360, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  10. 10
    Anthony, C. (1982) The Biochemistry of Methylotrophs, Academic Press, London, New York.
  11. 11
    Bar-Even, A. (2016) Formate Assimilation: The Metabolic Architecture of Natural and Synthetic Pathways. Biochemistry 55, 38513863,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.biochem.6b00495
  12. 12
    Erb, T. J., Jones, P. R., and Bar-Even, A. (2017) Synthetic metabolism: metabolic engineering meets enzyme design. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 37, 5662,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2016.12.023
  13. 13
    Bar-Even, A., Noor, E., Flamholz, A., and Milo, R. (2013) Design and analysis of metabolic pathways supporting formatotrophic growth for electricity-dependent cultivation of microbes. Biochim. Biophys. Acta, Bioenerg. 1827, 10391047,  DOI: 10.1016/j.bbabio.2012.10.013
  14. 14
    Fuchs, G. (1986) CO2 fixation in acetogenic bacteria: variations on a theme. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 39, 181213,  DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.1986.tb01859.x
  15. 15
    Schneeberger, A., Frings, J., and Schink, B. (1999) Net synthesis of acetate from CO2 by Eubacterium acidaminophilum through the glycine reductase pathway. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 177, 1,  DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.1999.tb13705.x
  16. 16
    Yishai, O., Bouzon, M., Doring, V., and Bar-Even, A. (2018) In Vivo Assimilation of One-Carbon via a Synthetic Reductive Glycine Pathway in Escherichia coli. ACS Synth. Biol. 7, 2023,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.8b00131
  17. 17
    Pasternack, L. B., Laude, D. A., Jr., and Appling, D. R. (1992) 13C NMR detection of folate-mediated serine and glycine synthesis in vivo in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biochemistry 31, 87138719,  DOI: 10.1021/bi00152a005
  18. 18
    Maaheimo, H., Fiaux, J., Cakar, Z. P., Bailey, J. E., Sauer, U., and Szyperski, T. (2001) Central carbon metabolism of Saccharomyces cerevisiae explored by biosynthetic fractional (13)C labeling of common amino acids. Eur. J. Biochem. 268, 24642479,  DOI: 10.1046/j.1432-1327.2001.02126.x
  19. 19
    Schlosser, T., Gatgens, C., Weber, U., and Stahmann, K. P. (2004) Alanine: glyoxylate aminotransferase of Saccharomyces cerevisiae-encoding gene AGX1 and metabolic significance. Yeast 21, 6373,  DOI: 10.1002/yea.1058
  20. 20
    Shannon, K. W. and Rabinowitz, J. C. (1988) Isolation and characterization of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae MIS1 gene encoding mitochondrial C1-tetrahydrofolate synthase. J. Biol. Chem. 263, 77177725
  21. 21
    Hochrein, L., Machens, F., Gremmels, J., Schulz, K., Messerschmidt, K., and Mueller-Roeber, B. (2017) AssemblX: a user-friendly toolkit for rapid and reliable multi-gene assemblies. Nucleic Acids Res. gkx034,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkx034
  22. 22
    Klein, S. M. and Sagers, R. D. (1966) Glycine metabolism. II. Kinetic and optical studies on the glycine decarboxylase system from Peptococcus glycinophilus. J. Biol. Chem. 241, 206209
  23. 23
    Hiraga, K. and Kikuchi, G. (1980) The mitochondrial glycine cleavage system. Functional association of glycine decarboxylase and aminomethyl carrier protein. J. Biol. Chem. 255, 1167111676
  24. 24
    Warnecke, T. and Gill, R. T. (2005) Organic acid toxicity, tolerance, and production in Escherichia coli biorefining applications. Microb. Cell Fact. 4, 25,  DOI: 10.1186/1475-2859-4-25
  25. 25
    Nicholls, P. (1975) Formate as an inhibitor of cytochrome c oxidase. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 67, 610616,  DOI: 10.1016/0006-291X(75)90856-6
  26. 26
    Zaldivar, J. and Ingram, L. O. (1999) Effect of organic acids on the growth and fermentation of ethanologenic Escherichia coli LY01. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 66, 203210,  DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0290(1999)66:4<203::AID-BIT1>3.0.CO;2-#
  27. 27
    Overkamp, K. M., Kotter, P., van der Hoek, R., Schoondermark-Stolk, S., Luttik, M. A., van Dijken, J. P., and Pronk, J. T. (2002) Functional analysis of structural genes for NAD(+)-dependent formate dehydrogenase in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast 19, 509520,  DOI: 10.1002/yea.856
  28. 28
    Babel, W. (2009) The Auxiliary Substrate Concept: From simple considerations to heuristically valuable knowledge. Eng. Life Sci. 9, 285290,  DOI: 10.1002/elsc.200900027
  29. 29
    Christensen, K. E. and Mackenzie, R. E. (2008) Mitochondrial methylenetetrahydrofolate dehydrogenase, methenyltetrahydrofolate cyclohydrolase, and formyltetrahydrofolate synthetases. Vitam. Horm. 79, 393410,  DOI: 10.1016/S0083-6729(08)00414-7
  30. 30
    Figueroa, I. A., Barnum, T. P., Somasekhar, P. Y., Carlstrom, C. I., Engelbrektson, A. L., and Coates, J. D. (2018) Metagenomics-guided analysis of microbial chemolithoautotrophic phosphite oxidation yields evidence of a seventh natural CO2 fixation pathway. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 115, E92E101,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1715549114
  31. 31
    Brachmann, C. B., Davies, A., Cost, G. J., Caputo, E., Li, J., Hieter, P., and Boeke, J. D. (1998) Designer deletion strains derived from Saccharomyces cerevisiae S288C: a useful set of strains and plasmids for PCR-mediated gene disruption and other applications. Yeast 14, 115132,  DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0061(19980130)14:2<115::AID-YEA204>3.0.CO;2-2
  32. 32
    Looke, M., Kristjuhan, K., and Kristjuhan, A. (2011) Extraction of genomic DNA from yeasts for PCR-based applications. BioTechniques 50, 325328,  DOI: 10.2144/000113672
  33. 33
    Gietz, R. D. and Schiestl, R. H. (2007) Quick and easy yeast transformation using the LiAc/SS carrier DNA/PEG method. Nat. Protoc. 2, 3537,  DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2007.14
  34. 34
    Hillson, N. J., Rosengarten, R. D., and Keasling, J. D. (2012) j5 DNA assembly design automation software. ACS Synth. Biol. 1, 1421,  DOI: 10.1021/sb2000116

Cited By

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!
Citation Statements
Explore this article's citation statements on scite.ai

This article is cited by 81 publications.

  1. Shaafique Chowdhury, Ray Westenberg, Kimberly Wennerholm, Ryan A.L. Cardiff, Alexander S. Beliaev, Vincent Noireaux, James M. Carothers, Pamela Peralta-Yahya. Carbon Negative Synthesis of Amino Acids Using a Cell-Free-Based Biocatalyst. ACS Synthetic Biology 2024, 13 (12) , 3961-3975. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.4c00359
  2. Fabian Machens, Guangyao Ran, Ciaran Ruehmkorff, Julie Meyer auf der Heyde, Bernd Mueller-Roeber, Lena Hochrein. PhiReX 2.0: A Programmable and Red Light-Regulated CRISPR-dCas9 System for the Activation of Endogenous Genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. ACS Synthetic Biology 2023, 12 (4) , 1046-1057. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.2c00517
  3. Philip A. Kelso, Louise K. M. Chow, Alex C. Carpenter, Ian T. Paulsen, Thomas C. Williams. Toward Methanol-Based Biomanufacturing: Emerging Strategies for Engineering Synthetic Methylotrophy in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. ACS Synthetic Biology 2022, 11 (8) , 2548-2563. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.2c00110
  4. Shengyuan Guo, Tristan Asset, Plamen Atanassov. Catalytic Hybrid Electrocatalytic/Biocatalytic Cascades for Carbon Dioxide Reduction and Valorization. ACS Catalysis 2021, 11 (9) , 5172-5188. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.0c04862
  5. Cong Fan, Jian Fan, Haofeng Chen, Shujin Lin, Danli Zhang, Jingya Song, Junyi Wang, Yan Wang, Xiao Han, Jifeng Yuan. Switching the yeast metabolism via manipulation of sugar phosphorylation. Metabolic Engineering 2025, 89 , 76-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymben.2025.02.008
  6. Mingming Qi, Chao Zhu, Chi Cheng, Wei Kang, Chuang Xue. Rewiring methanol assimilation and reductive glycine pathways in Saccharomyces cerevisiae to increase one-carbon recovery. Green Chemistry 2025, 27 (12) , 3261-3271. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4GC05254D
  7. Feng Guo, Kang Liu, Yangyi Qiao, YongMin Zheng, Chenguang Liu, Yi Wu, Zhonghai Zhang, Wankui Jiang, Yujia Jiang, Fengxue Xin, Min Jiang, Wenming Zhang. Evolutionary engineering of Saccharomyces cerevisiae : Crafting a synthetic methylotroph via self-reprogramming. Science Advances 2024, 10 (51) https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adq3484
  8. Yan Shi, Kejing Zhang, Jianxin Chen, Bingtian Zhang, Xun Guan, Xin Wang, Tong Zhang, Han Song, Long Zou, Xiangfeng Duan, Haichun Gao, Zhang Lin. Long‐Term Autotrophic Growth and Solar‐to‐Chemical Conversion in Shewanella Oneidensis MR‐1 through Light‐Driven Electron Transfer. Angewandte Chemie 2024, 136 (51) https://doi.org/10.1002/ange.202412072
  9. Yan Shi, Kejing Zhang, Jianxin Chen, Bingtian Zhang, Xun Guan, Xin Wang, Tong Zhang, Han Song, Long Zou, Xiangfeng Duan, Haichun Gao, Zhang Lin. Long‐Term Autotrophic Growth and Solar‐to‐Chemical Conversion in Shewanella Oneidensis MR‐1 through Light‐Driven Electron Transfer. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 2024, 63 (51) https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.202412072
  10. Yuanyi Li, Wei Zhou, Ruijing Ling, Shuting Hou, Lujia Zhang, Bei Gao. Revealing the endogenous homoserine cycle for the effective methanol conversion in Pichia pastoris. Process Biochemistry 2024, 144 , 287-293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2024.06.002
  11. Yuanke Guo, Rui Zhang, Jing Wang, Ruirui Qin, Jiao Feng, Kequan Chen, Xin Wang. Engineering yeasts to Co-utilize methanol or formate coupled with CO2 fixation. Metabolic Engineering 2024, 84 , 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymben.2024.05.002
  12. Qian Chen, Yunhong Chen, Zeming Hou, Yuyue Ma, Jianfeng Huang, Zhidan Zhang, Yefu Chen, Xue Yang, Yanfei Zhang, Guoping Zhao. Unlocking the formate utilization of wild‐type Yarrowia lipolytica through adaptive laboratory evolution. Biotechnology Journal 2024, 19 (6) https://doi.org/10.1002/biot.202400290
  13. Kai Li, Xue Zhang, Cheng Li, Yu-Cheng Liang, Xin-Qing Zhao, Chen-Guang Liu, Anthony J. Sinskey, Feng-Wu Bai. Systems metabolic engineering of Corynebacterium glutamicum to assimilate formic acid for biomass accumulation and succinic acid production. Bioresource Technology 2024, 402 , 130774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2024.130774
  14. Rishi Gupta, Archana Mishra, Yeruva Thirupathaiah, Anuj Kumar Chandel. Biochemical conversion of CO2 in fuels and chemicals: status, innovation, and industrial aspects. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery 2024, 14 (3) , 3007-3030. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-022-02552-8
  15. Pei-Ru Chen, Peng-Fei Xia. Carbon recycling with synthetic CO2 fixation pathways. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 2024, 85 , 103023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2023.103023
  16. Xue Yang, Yanfei Zhang, Guoping Zhao. Artificial carbon assimilation: From unnatural reactions and pathways to synthetic autotrophic systems. Biotechnology Advances 2024, 70 , 108294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2023.108294
  17. Qi Xia, Junzhu Yang, Liangwei Hu, Hongxin Zhao, Yuan Lu. Biotransforming CO2 into valuable chemicals. Journal of Cleaner Production 2024, 434 , 140185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140185
  18. Viswanada R. Bysani, Ayesha S. Alam, Arren Bar-Even, Fabian Machens. Engineering and evolution of the complete Reductive Glycine Pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae for formate and CO2 assimilation. Metabolic Engineering 2024, 81 , 167-181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymben.2023.11.007
  19. Evelyn Vásquez Castro, Golnaz Memari, Özge Ata, Diethard Mattanovich. Carbon efficient production of chemicals with yeasts. Yeast 2023, 40 (12) , 583-593. https://doi.org/10.1002/yea.3909
  20. Enrico Orsi, Pablo Ivan Nikel, Lars Keld Nielsen, Stefano Donati. Synergistic investigation of natural and synthetic C1-trophic microorganisms to foster a circular carbon economy. Nature Communications 2023, 14 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-42166-w
  21. Jinzhong Tian, Wangshuying Deng, Ziwen Zhang, Jiaqi Xu, Guiling Yang, Guoping Zhao, Sheng Yang, Weihong Jiang, Yang Gu. Discovery and remodeling of Vibrio natriegens as a microbial platform for efficient formic acid biorefinery. Nature Communications 2023, 14 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-43631-2
  22. Shijie Xu, Weibo Qiao, Zuanwen Wang, Xiaoying Fu, Zihe Liu, Shuobo Shi. Exploiting a heterologous construction of the 3-hydroxypropionic acid carbon fixation pathway with mesaconate as an indicator in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Bioresources and Bioprocessing 2023, 10 (1) https://doi.org/10.1186/s40643-023-00652-5
  23. Elif Kurt, Jiansong Qin, Alexandria Williams, Youbo Zhao, Dongming Xie. Perspectives for Using CO2 as a Feedstock for Biomanufacturing of Fuels and Chemicals. Bioengineering 2023, 10 (12) , 1357. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10121357
  24. Du-Kyeong Kang, Seung-Hwa Kim, Jung-Hoon Sohn, Bong Hyun Sung. Insights into Enzyme Reactions with Redox Cofactors in Biological Conversion of CO 2. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 2023, 33 (11) , 1403-1411. https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.2306.06005
  25. Wang Ge-Ge, Zhang Yuan, Wang Xiao-Yan, Zhang Gen-Lin. Microbial Conversion and Utilization of CO2. Annals of Civil and Environmental Engineering 2023, 7 (1) , 045-060. https://doi.org/10.29328/journal.acee.1001055
  26. Qing Wang, Jianfeng Zhang, Qiulan Dai, Meijie Cui, Hao Yang, Peijian Cao, Lei Zhao. When green carbon plants meet synthetic biology. Modern Agriculture 2023, 1 (2) , 98-111. https://doi.org/10.1002/moda.17
  27. Yamei Gan, Xin Meng, Cong Gao, Wei Song, Liming Liu, Xiulai Chen. Metabolic engineering strategies for microbial utilization of methanol. Engineering Microbiology 2023, 3 (3) , 100081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engmic.2023.100081
  28. Kai Wang, Yining Liu, Zhuoheng Wu, Yilu Wu, Haoran Bi, Yanhui Liu, Meng Wang, Biqiang Chen, Jens Nielsen, Zihe Liu, Tianwei Tan. Investigating formate tolerance mechanisms in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and its application. Green Carbon 2023, 1 (1) , 65-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.greenca.2023.08.003
  29. Lukas R. Dahlin, Alex W. Meyers, Skylar W. Stefani, Ellsbeth G. Webb, Benton Wachter, Venkataramanan Subramanian, Michael T. Guarnieri. Heterologous expression of formate dehydrogenase enables photoformatotrophy in the emerging model microalga, Picochlorum renovo. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 2023, 11 https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2023.1162745
  30. Feng Guo, Yangyi Qiao, Fengxue Xin, Wenming Zhang, Min Jiang. Bioconversion of C1 feedstocks for chemical production using Pichia pastoris. Trends in Biotechnology 2023, 41 (8) , 1066-1079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2023.03.006
  31. Viswanada R Bysani, Ayesha S M Alam, Arren Bar-Even, Fabian Machens. Engineering and Evolution of the Complete Reductive Glycine Pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae for Formate and CO 2 Assimilation. 2023https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.07.10.548313
  32. Shuobo Shi, Yubo Wang, Weibo Qiao, Longhao Wu, Zihe Liu, Tianwei Tan. Challenges and opportunities in the third-generation biorefinery. Chinese Science Bulletin 2023, 68 (19) , 2489-2503. https://doi.org/10.1360/TB-2022-1210
  33. Yongfei Liu, Jianming Liu, Jinglei Nie, Anping Zeng. Advances and perspectives of biosynthesis of chemicals based on CO2 and other one-carbon feedstocks. Chinese Science Bulletin 2023, 68 (19) , 2470-2488. https://doi.org/10.1360/TB-2022-1300
  34. Ran Zhao, Wenyue Dong, Chen Yang, Weihong Jiang, Jinzhong Tian, Yang Gu. Formate as a supplementary substrate facilitates sugar metabolism and solvent production by Clostridium beijerinckii NCIMB 8052. Synthetic and Systems Biotechnology 2023, 8 (2) , 196-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.synbio.2023.01.005
  35. Kai Wang, Yangyang Da, Haoran Bi, Yanhui Liu, Biqiang Chen, Meng Wang, Zihe Liu, Jens Nielsen, Tianwei Tan. A one-carbon chemicals conversion strategy to produce precursor of biofuels with Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Renewable Energy 2023, 208 , 331-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.03.058
  36. Ranran Wu, Fei Li, Xinyu Cui, Zehua Li, Chunling Ma, Huifeng Jiang, Lingling Zhang, Yi‐Heng P. Job Zhang, Tongxin Zhao, Yanping Zhang, Yin Li, Hui Chen, Zhiguang Zhu. Enzymatic Electrosynthesis of Glycine from CO 2 and NH 3. Angewandte Chemie 2023, 135 (14) https://doi.org/10.1002/ange.202218387
  37. Ranran Wu, Fei Li, Xinyu Cui, Zehua Li, Chunling Ma, Huifeng Jiang, Lingling Zhang, Yi‐Heng P. Job Zhang, Tongxin Zhao, Yanping Zhang, Yin Li, Hui Chen, Zhiguang Zhu. Enzymatic Electrosynthesis of Glycine from CO 2 and NH 3. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 2023, 62 (14) https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.202218387
  38. Yuanke Guo, Rui Zhang, Jing Wang, Ruirui Qin, Jiao Feng, Kequan Chen, Xin Wang. Engineering Yeasts to Grow Solely on Methanol or Formic acid coupled with CO2 fixation. 2023https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2694097/v1
  39. Jian Xu, Jie Wang, Chunling Ma, Zuoxi Wei, Yida Zhai, Na Tian, Zhiguang Zhu, Min Xue, Demao Li. Embracing a low-carbon future by the production and marketing of C1 gas protein. Biotechnology Advances 2023, 63 , 108096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2023.108096
  40. Lyon Bruinsma, Sebastian Wenk, Nico J. Claassens, Vitor A.P. Martins dos Santos. Paving the way for synthetic C1 - Metabolism in Pseudomonas putida through the reductive glycine pathway. Metabolic Engineering 2023, 76 , 215-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymben.2023.02.004
  41. Jian Zhang, Liang Guo, Cong Gao, Wei Song, Jing Wu, Liming Liu, Xiulai Chen. Metabolic engineering strategies for microbial utilization of C1 feedstocks. Systems Microbiology and Biomanufacturing 2023, 3 (1) , 122-136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43393-022-00135-2
  42. Hermann Bauwe. Humboldt Review: Photorespiration – Rubisco's repair crew. Journal of Plant Physiology 2023, 280 , 153899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2022.153899
  43. Wei Zhong, Hailong Li, Yajie Wang. Design and Construction of Artificial Biological Systems for One-Carbon Utilization. BioDesign Research 2023, 5 , 0021. https://doi.org/10.34133/bdr.0021
  44. Jinzhong Tian, Wangshuying Deng, Ziwen Zhang, Jiaqi Xu, Guoping Zhao, Sheng Yang, Weihong Jiang, Yang Gu. Discovery and remodeling of Vibrio natriegens as a microbial platform for efficient formic acid biorefinery. 2022https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.15.520533
  45. Bing Liu, Haijian Li, Hualan Zhou, Jianguo Zhang. Enhancing xylanase expression by Komagataella phaffii by formate as carbon source and inducer. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 2022, 106 (23) , 7819-7829. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-022-12249-7
  46. Briardo Llorente, Thomas C. Williams, Hugh D. Goold, Isak S. Pretorius, Ian T. Paulsen. Harnessing bioengineered microbes as a versatile platform for space nutrition. Nature Communications 2022, 13 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-33974-7
  47. Vanessa Wegat, Jonathan T. Fabarius, Volker Sieber. Synthetic methylotrophic yeasts for the sustainable fuel and chemical production. Biotechnology for Biofuels and Bioproducts 2022, 15 (1) https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-022-02210-1
  48. Hawaibam Birla Singh, Min-Kyoung Kang, Moonhyuk Kwon, Seon-Won Kim. Developing methylotrophic microbial platforms for a methanol-based bioindustry. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 2022, 10 https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.1050740
  49. Weibo Qiao, Shijie Xu, Zihe Liu, Xiaoying Fu, Huimin Zhao, Shuobo Shi. Challenges and opportunities in C1-based biomanufacturing. Bioresource Technology 2022, 364 , 128095. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2022.128095
  50. Nils Guntermann, Giancarlo Franciò, Walter Leitner. Hydrogenation of CO 2 to formic acid in biphasic systems using aqueous solutions of amino acids as the product phase. Green Chemistry 2022, 24 (20) , 8069-8075. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2GC02598A
  51. Bernd M. Mitic, Christina Troyer, Stephan Hann, Diethard Mattanovich. The oxygen tolerant reductive glycine pathway in eukaryotes – a native methanol, formate and CO 2 assimilation pathway in the yeast Komagataella phaffii. 2022https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.09.01.506198
  52. David N. Carruthers, Taek Soon Lee. Translating advances in microbial bioproduction to sustainable biotechnology. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 2022, 10 https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.968437
  53. Lyon Bruinsma, Sebastian Wenk, Nico J. Claassens, Vitor A.P. Martins dos Santos. Paving the way for synthetic C1- metabolism in Pseudomonas putida through the reductive glycine pathway. 2022https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.07.10.499465
  54. Congqiang Zhang, Christoph Ottenheim, Melanie Weingarten, LiangHui Ji. Microbial Utilization of Next-Generation Feedstocks for the Biomanufacturing of Value-Added Chemicals and Food Ingredients. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 2022, 10 https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.874612
  55. Cong Du, Yimin Li, Ruijuan Xiang, Wenjie Yuan. Formate Dehydrogenase Improves the Resistance to Formic Acid and Acetic Acid Simultaneously in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2022, 23 (6) , 3406. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23063406
  56. Lena Ullmann, Lars M. Blank. Entwicklung von Ustilago als Chassis für die CO2-neutrale Itakonatproduktion. BIOspektrum 2022, 28 (1) , 97-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12268-022-1689-6
  57. Liliana Calzadiaz-Ramirez, Anne S Meyer. Formate dehydrogenases for CO2 utilization. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 2022, 73 , 95-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2021.07.011
  58. Yingying Xu, Jie Ren, Wei Wang, An‐Ping Zeng. Improvement of glycine biosynthesis from one‐carbon compounds and ammonia catalyzed by the glycine cleavage system in vitro. Engineering in Life Sciences 2022, 22 (1) , 40-53. https://doi.org/10.1002/elsc.202100047
  59. Nico J. Claassens, Ari Satanowski, Viswanada R. Bysani, Beau Dronsella, Enrico Orsi, Vittorio Rainaldi, Suzan Yilmaz, Sebastian Wenk, Steffen N. Lindner. Engineering the Reductive Glycine Pathway: A Promising Synthetic Metabolism Approach for C1-Assimilation. 2022, 299-350. https://doi.org/10.1007/10_2021_181
  60. Jie Ren, Wei Wang, Jinglei Nie, Wenqiao Yuan, An-Ping Zeng. Understanding and Engineering Glycine Cleavage System and Related Metabolic Pathways for C1-Based Biosynthesis. 2022, 273-298. https://doi.org/10.1007/10_2021_186
  61. Yaeseong Hong, An-Ping Zeng. Biosynthesis Based on One-Carbon Mixotrophy. 2022, 351-371. https://doi.org/10.1007/10_2021_198
  62. Thomas A. Dixon, Thomas C. Williams, Isak S. Pretorius. Bioinformational trends in grape and wine biotechnology. Trends in Biotechnology 2022, 40 (1) , 124-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2021.05.001
  63. Nils Guntermann, Hendrik G. Mengers, Giancarlo Franciò, Lars M. Blank, Walter Leitner. Bio-energy conversion with carbon capture and utilization (BECCU): integrated biomass fermentation and chemo-catalytic CO 2 hydrogenation for bioethanol and formic acid co-production. Green Chemistry 2021, 23 (24) , 9860-9864. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1GC02915K
  64. Christian Simon Neuendorf, Gabriel A. Vignolle, Christian Derntl, Tamara Tomin, Katharina Novak, Robert L. Mach, Ruth Birner-Grünberger, Stefan Pflügl. A quantitative metabolic analysis reveals Acetobacterium woodii as a flexible and robust host for formate-based bioproduction. Metabolic Engineering 2021, 68 , 68-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymben.2021.09.004
  65. Mihris Ibnu Saleem Naduthodi, Nico J. Claassens, Sarah D’Adamo, John van der Oost, Maria J. Barbosa. Synthetic Biology Approaches To Enhance Microalgal Productivity. Trends in Biotechnology 2021, 39 (10) , 1019-1036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2020.12.010
  66. Wei Jiang, David Hernández Villamor, Huadong Peng, Jian Chen, Long Liu, Victoria Haritos, Rodrigo Ledesma-Amaro. Metabolic engineering strategies to enable microbial utilization of C1 feedstocks. Nature Chemical Biology 2021, 17 (8) , 845-855. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41589-021-00836-0
  67. Nico J. Claassens. Reductive Glycine Pathway: A Versatile Route for One-Carbon Biotech. Trends in Biotechnology 2021, 39 (4) , 327-329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2021.02.005
  68. Yingying Xu, Yuchen Li, Han Zhang, Jinglei Nie, Jie Ren, Wei Wang, An-Ping Zeng. Stand-alone lipoylated H-protein of the glycine cleavage system enables glycine cleavage and the synthesis of glycine from one-carbon compounds in vitro. 2021https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.28.437365
  69. Yaeseong Hong, Philipp Arbter, Wei Wang, Lilian N. Rojas, An‐Ping Zeng. Introduction of glycine synthase enables uptake of exogenous formate and strongly impacts the metabolism in Clostridium pasteurianum. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 2021, 118 (3) , 1366-1380. https://doi.org/10.1002/bit.27658
  70. Diep Thi Ngoc Nguyen, Ok Kyung Lee, Thu Thi Nguyen, Eun Yeol Lee. Type II methanotrophs: A promising microbial cell-factory platform for bioconversion of methane to chemicals. Biotechnology Advances 2021, 47 , 107700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2021.107700
  71. Yiming Zhang, Jens Nielsen, Zihe Liu. Yeast based biorefineries for oleochemical production. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 2021, 67 , 26-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2020.11.009
  72. Qiaoyu Yang, Xiaoxian Guo, Yuwan Liu, Huifeng Jiang. Biocatalytic C-C Bond Formation for One Carbon Resource Utilization. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2021, 22 (4) , 1890. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22041890
  73. Lena Ullmann, An N. T. Phan, Daniel K. P. Kaplan, Lars M. Blank. Ustilaginaceae Biocatalyst for Co-Metabolism of CO2-Derived Substrates toward Carbon-Neutral Itaconate Production. Journal of Fungi 2021, 7 (2) , 98. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof7020098
  74. Feng Guo, Shangjie Zhang, Yujia Jiang, Huixin Xu, Fengxue Xin, Wenming Zhang, Min Jiang. Bioconversion of Methanol by Synthetic Methylotrophy. 2021, 149-168. https://doi.org/10.1007/10_2021_176
  75. Irene Sánchez-Andrea, Iame Alves Guedes, Bastian Hornung, Sjef Boeren, Christopher E. Lawson, Diana Z. Sousa, Arren Bar-Even, Nico J. Claassens, Alfons J. M. Stams. The reductive glycine pathway allows autotrophic growth of Desulfovibrio desulfuricans. Nature Communications 2020, 11 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18906-7
  76. Monica I. Espinosa, Ricardo A. Gonzalez-Garcia, Kaspar Valgepea, Manuel R. Plan, Colin Scott, Isak S. Pretorius, Esteban Marcellin, Ian T. Paulsen, Thomas C. Williams. Adaptive laboratory evolution of native methanol assimilation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nature Communications 2020, 11 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-19390-9
  77. Daniel Schindler. Genetic Engineering and Synthetic Genomics in Yeast to Understand Life and Boost Biotechnology. Bioengineering 2020, 7 (4) , 137. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering7040137
  78. Bo Liang, Yukun Zhao, Jianming Yang. Recent Advances in Developing Artificial Autotrophic Microorganism for Reinforcing CO2 Fixation. Frontiers in Microbiology 2020, 11 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.592631
  79. Wen Mao, Qianqian Yuan, Hongge Qi, Zhiwen Wang, Hongwu Ma, Tao Chen. Recent progress in metabolic engineering of microbial formate assimilation. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 2020, 104 (16) , 6905-6917. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-020-10725-6
  80. Yaeseong Hong, Jie Ren, Xinyi Zhang, Wei Wang, An-Ping Zeng. Quantitative analysis of glycine related metabolic pathways for one-carbon synthetic biology. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 2020, 64 , 70-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2019.10.001
  81. Charles AR Cotton, Nico J Claassens, Sara Benito-Vaquerizo, Arren Bar-Even. Renewable methanol and formate as microbial feedstocks. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 2020, 62 , 168-180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2019.10.002
  82. Taicheng Zhu, Tongxin Zhao, Olufemi Emmanuel Bankefa, Yin Li. Engineering unnatural methylotrophic cell factories for methanol-based biomanufacturing: Challenges and opportunities. Biotechnology Advances 2020, 39 , 107467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2019.107467
  83. Zihe Liu, Kai Wang, Yun Chen, Tianwei Tan, Jens Nielsen. Third-generation biorefineries as the means to produce fuels and chemicals from CO2. Nature Catalysis 2020, 3 (3) , 274-288. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41929-019-0421-5
  84. Rahul Kumar, Petri-Jaan Lahtvee. Proteome overabundance enables respiration but limitation onsets carbon overflow. 2020https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.20.957662
  85. Xiaojia Guo, Yuxue Liu, Qian Wang, Xueying Wang, Qing Li, Wujun Liu, Zongbao K. Zhao. Non‐natural Cofactor and Formate‐Driven Reductive Carboxylation of Pyruvate. Angewandte Chemie 2020, 132 (8) , 3167-3170. https://doi.org/10.1002/ange.201915303
  86. Xiaojia Guo, Yuxue Liu, Qian Wang, Xueying Wang, Qing Li, Wujun Liu, Zongbao K. Zhao. Non‐natural Cofactor and Formate‐Driven Reductive Carboxylation of Pyruvate. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 2020, 59 (8) , 3143-3146. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201915303
  87. Zhengshan Luo, Weizhu Zeng, Guocheng Du, Jian Chen, Jingwen Zhou. Enhancement of pyruvic acid production in Candida glabrata by engineering hypoxia-inducible factor 1. Bioresource Technology 2020, 295 , 122248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.122248
  88. Monica I. Espinosa, Thomas C. Williams, Isak S. Pretorius, Ian T. Paulsen. Benchmarking two Saccharomyces cerevisiae laboratory strains for growth and transcriptional response to methanol. Synthetic and Systems Biotechnology 2019, 4 (4) , 180-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.synbio.2019.10.001
  89. Monica I. Espinosa, Ricardo A. Gonzalez-Garcia, Kaspar Valgepea, Manuel Plan, Colin Scott, Isak S. Pretorius, Esteban Marcellin, Ian T. Paulsen, Thomas C. Williams. Engineering and Evolution of Methanol Assimilation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. 2019https://doi.org/10.1101/717942

ACS Synthetic Biology

Cite this: ACS Synth. Biol. 2019, 8, 5, 911–917
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.8b00464
Published April 19, 2019

Copyright © 2019 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under CC-BY.

Article Views

6539

Altmetric

-

Citations

Learn about these metrics

Article Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.

Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.

The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated.

  • Abstract

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. Reductive glycine pathway and a selection scheme for its activity in yeast. (A) The “metabolic engine” of the reductive glycine pathway: condensation of C1-moieties into the C2 compound glycine. Substructure of tetrahydrofolate (THF) is shown in brown. Lipoic acid attached to the H-protein of the glycine cleavage/synthase system (GCS) is shown in green. (B) Gene deletions (marked in red) required for the construction of a glycine auxotroph strain, which we used to select for glycine biosynthesis from the activity of the reductive glycine pathway; pathway enzymes are shown in green.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Three plasmids harboring genes encoding for different subsets of the enzymes of the reductive glycine pathway. pJGC1 harbors only the gene that encodes for MIS1, a trifunctional enzyme that converts formate to methylene-THF. pJGC2 harbors the genes encoding for the subunits of the GCS (the gene encoding for dihydrolipoamide dehydrogenase, LPD1, was not overexpressed since we reasoned its native expression would suffice as it participates in other complexes in the mitochondria, i.e., pyruvate dehydrogenase and 2-ketoglutarate dehydrogenase). pJGC3 harbors the genes encoding for MIS1 and the enzymes of the GCS. Each gene was regulated by a different strong, constitutive promoter as shown in the figure. Each plasmid was based on the pL1A-lc vector backbone as explained in the Methods section.

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. Formate-dependent growth. (A) Growth of the glycine auxotroph strain harboring the pJGC3 plasmid using different concentrations of formate, 2% glucose and 10% CO2. “No OE” refers to the negative control, i.e., a glycine auxotroph strain without a plasmid, while “No OE + glycine” refers to the positive control, i.e., a glycine auxotroph strain without a plasmid where glycine was added to the medium. Each curve represents the average of three replicates, which were not different by more than 10%. Growth curves were cut after reaching stationary phase. (B) Calculated growth rate as a function of formate concentration. Growth rate increases with increasing formate concentration up to 1 mM, remains rather stable up to 500 mM, and then sharply decreases with higher concentrations. .

    Figure 4

    Figure 4. 13C-labeling experiments confirm glycine production from formate. Fraction of labeling of different amino acids in different strains and labeled feedstocks is shown. “G” corresponds to glycine, “S” to serine, “A” to alanine, “M” to methionine, and “T” to threonine. Complete labeling of glycine in the glycine auxotroph strain harboring pJGC3 upon feeding with 13C-formate confirms that glycine biosynthesis occurs only via the reductive glycine pathway. Partial labeling of glycine with 13C-CO2 is attributed to the high production rate of unlabeled CO2 in the mitochondria. See main text for a detailed discussion on the labeling pattern of these amino acids.

  • References


    This article references 34 other publications.

    1. 1
      Vorholt, J. A. (2012) Microbial life in the phyllosphere. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 10, 828840,  DOI: 10.1038/nrmicro2910
    2. 2
      Abubackar, H. N., eiga, M. C., and Kennes, C. (2011) Biological conversion of carbon monoxide: rich syngas or waste gases to bioethanol. Biofuels, Bioprod. Biorefin. 5, 93114,  DOI: 10.1002/bbb.256
    3. 3
      Kopljar, D., Inan, A., Vindayer, P., Wagner, N., and Klemm, E. (2014) Electrochemical reduction of CO2 to formate at high current density using gas diffusion electrodes. J. Appl. Electrochem. 44, 11071116,  DOI: 10.1007/s10800-014-0731-x
    4. 4
      Yang, H., Kaczur, J. J., Sajjad, S. D., and Masel, R. I. (2017) Electrochemical conversion of CO2 to formic acid utilizing Sustainion membranes. Journal of CO2 Utilization 20, 208217,  DOI: 10.1016/j.jcou.2017.04.011
    5. 5
      Bennett, R. K., Steinberg, L. M., Chen, W., and Papoutsakis, E. T. (2018) Engineering the bioconversion of methane and methanol to fuels and chemicals in native and synthetic methylotrophs. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 50, 8193,  DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2017.11.010
    6. 6
      Bengelsdorf, F. R. and Durre, P. (2017) Gas fermentation for commodity chemicals and fuels. Microb. Biotechnol. 10, 11671170,  DOI: 10.1111/1751-7915.12763
    7. 7
      Yishai, O., Lindner, S. N., Gonzalez de la Cruz, J., Tenenboim, H., and Bar-Even, A. (2016) The formate bio-economy. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 35, 19,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2016.07.005
    8. 8
      Naik, S. N., Goud, V. V., Rout, P. K., and Dalai, A. K. (2010) Production of first and second generation biofuels: a comprehensive review. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 14, 578597,  DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2009.10.003
    9. 9
      Drake, H. L., Küsel, K., and Matthies, C. (2013) Acetogenic prokaryotes, In The Prokaryotes, pp 360, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
    10. 10
      Anthony, C. (1982) The Biochemistry of Methylotrophs, Academic Press, London, New York.
    11. 11
      Bar-Even, A. (2016) Formate Assimilation: The Metabolic Architecture of Natural and Synthetic Pathways. Biochemistry 55, 38513863,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.biochem.6b00495
    12. 12
      Erb, T. J., Jones, P. R., and Bar-Even, A. (2017) Synthetic metabolism: metabolic engineering meets enzyme design. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 37, 5662,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2016.12.023
    13. 13
      Bar-Even, A., Noor, E., Flamholz, A., and Milo, R. (2013) Design and analysis of metabolic pathways supporting formatotrophic growth for electricity-dependent cultivation of microbes. Biochim. Biophys. Acta, Bioenerg. 1827, 10391047,  DOI: 10.1016/j.bbabio.2012.10.013
    14. 14
      Fuchs, G. (1986) CO2 fixation in acetogenic bacteria: variations on a theme. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 39, 181213,  DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.1986.tb01859.x
    15. 15
      Schneeberger, A., Frings, J., and Schink, B. (1999) Net synthesis of acetate from CO2 by Eubacterium acidaminophilum through the glycine reductase pathway. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 177, 1,  DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.1999.tb13705.x
    16. 16
      Yishai, O., Bouzon, M., Doring, V., and Bar-Even, A. (2018) In Vivo Assimilation of One-Carbon via a Synthetic Reductive Glycine Pathway in Escherichia coli. ACS Synth. Biol. 7, 2023,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.8b00131
    17. 17
      Pasternack, L. B., Laude, D. A., Jr., and Appling, D. R. (1992) 13C NMR detection of folate-mediated serine and glycine synthesis in vivo in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biochemistry 31, 87138719,  DOI: 10.1021/bi00152a005
    18. 18
      Maaheimo, H., Fiaux, J., Cakar, Z. P., Bailey, J. E., Sauer, U., and Szyperski, T. (2001) Central carbon metabolism of Saccharomyces cerevisiae explored by biosynthetic fractional (13)C labeling of common amino acids. Eur. J. Biochem. 268, 24642479,  DOI: 10.1046/j.1432-1327.2001.02126.x
    19. 19
      Schlosser, T., Gatgens, C., Weber, U., and Stahmann, K. P. (2004) Alanine: glyoxylate aminotransferase of Saccharomyces cerevisiae-encoding gene AGX1 and metabolic significance. Yeast 21, 6373,  DOI: 10.1002/yea.1058
    20. 20
      Shannon, K. W. and Rabinowitz, J. C. (1988) Isolation and characterization of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae MIS1 gene encoding mitochondrial C1-tetrahydrofolate synthase. J. Biol. Chem. 263, 77177725
    21. 21
      Hochrein, L., Machens, F., Gremmels, J., Schulz, K., Messerschmidt, K., and Mueller-Roeber, B. (2017) AssemblX: a user-friendly toolkit for rapid and reliable multi-gene assemblies. Nucleic Acids Res. gkx034,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkx034
    22. 22
      Klein, S. M. and Sagers, R. D. (1966) Glycine metabolism. II. Kinetic and optical studies on the glycine decarboxylase system from Peptococcus glycinophilus. J. Biol. Chem. 241, 206209
    23. 23
      Hiraga, K. and Kikuchi, G. (1980) The mitochondrial glycine cleavage system. Functional association of glycine decarboxylase and aminomethyl carrier protein. J. Biol. Chem. 255, 1167111676
    24. 24
      Warnecke, T. and Gill, R. T. (2005) Organic acid toxicity, tolerance, and production in Escherichia coli biorefining applications. Microb. Cell Fact. 4, 25,  DOI: 10.1186/1475-2859-4-25
    25. 25
      Nicholls, P. (1975) Formate as an inhibitor of cytochrome c oxidase. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 67, 610616,  DOI: 10.1016/0006-291X(75)90856-6
    26. 26
      Zaldivar, J. and Ingram, L. O. (1999) Effect of organic acids on the growth and fermentation of ethanologenic Escherichia coli LY01. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 66, 203210,  DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0290(1999)66:4<203::AID-BIT1>3.0.CO;2-#
    27. 27
      Overkamp, K. M., Kotter, P., van der Hoek, R., Schoondermark-Stolk, S., Luttik, M. A., van Dijken, J. P., and Pronk, J. T. (2002) Functional analysis of structural genes for NAD(+)-dependent formate dehydrogenase in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast 19, 509520,  DOI: 10.1002/yea.856
    28. 28
      Babel, W. (2009) The Auxiliary Substrate Concept: From simple considerations to heuristically valuable knowledge. Eng. Life Sci. 9, 285290,  DOI: 10.1002/elsc.200900027
    29. 29
      Christensen, K. E. and Mackenzie, R. E. (2008) Mitochondrial methylenetetrahydrofolate dehydrogenase, methenyltetrahydrofolate cyclohydrolase, and formyltetrahydrofolate synthetases. Vitam. Horm. 79, 393410,  DOI: 10.1016/S0083-6729(08)00414-7
    30. 30
      Figueroa, I. A., Barnum, T. P., Somasekhar, P. Y., Carlstrom, C. I., Engelbrektson, A. L., and Coates, J. D. (2018) Metagenomics-guided analysis of microbial chemolithoautotrophic phosphite oxidation yields evidence of a seventh natural CO2 fixation pathway. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 115, E92E101,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1715549114
    31. 31
      Brachmann, C. B., Davies, A., Cost, G. J., Caputo, E., Li, J., Hieter, P., and Boeke, J. D. (1998) Designer deletion strains derived from Saccharomyces cerevisiae S288C: a useful set of strains and plasmids for PCR-mediated gene disruption and other applications. Yeast 14, 115132,  DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0061(19980130)14:2<115::AID-YEA204>3.0.CO;2-2
    32. 32
      Looke, M., Kristjuhan, K., and Kristjuhan, A. (2011) Extraction of genomic DNA from yeasts for PCR-based applications. BioTechniques 50, 325328,  DOI: 10.2144/000113672
    33. 33
      Gietz, R. D. and Schiestl, R. H. (2007) Quick and easy yeast transformation using the LiAc/SS carrier DNA/PEG method. Nat. Protoc. 2, 3537,  DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2007.14
    34. 34
      Hillson, N. J., Rosengarten, R. D., and Keasling, J. D. (2012) j5 DNA assembly design automation software. ACS Synth. Biol. 1, 1421,  DOI: 10.1021/sb2000116
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information


    The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.8b00464.

    • Table S1: Genetic constructs used in this study; Table S2: DNA primers used in this study (PDF)


    Terms & Conditions

    Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.