↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of Thermobifida fusca Cellulases Expressed in Escherichia coli and Nicotiana tabacum Indicates Advantages of the Plant System for the Expression of Bacterial Cellulases

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of Thermobifida fusca Cellulases Expressed in Escherichia coli and Nicotiana tabacum Indicates Advantages of the Plant System for the Expression of Bacterial Cellulases
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, December 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2015.01047
Pubmed ID
Authors

Johannes Klinger, Rainer Fischer, Ulrich Commandeur

Abstract

The economic conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to biofuels requires in addition to pretreatment techniques access to large quantities of inexpensive cellulases to be competitive with established first generation processes. A solution to this problem could be achieved by plant based expression of these enzymes. We expressed the complete set of six cellulases and an additional β-glucosidase expressed from Thermobifida fusca in the bacterium Escherichia coli and in tobacco plants (Nicotiana tabacum). This was done to determine whether functional enzyme expression was feasible in these organisms. In extracts of recombinant E. coli cells, five of the proteins were detected by western blot analysis, but exocellulases E3 and E6 were undetectable. In the plant-based expression system we were able to detect all six cellulases but not the β-glucosidase even though activity was detectable. When E. coli was used as the expression system, endocellulase E2 was active, while endocellulases E1 and E5 showed only residual activity. The remaining cellulases appeared completely inactive against the model substrates azo-carboxymethyl-cellulose (Azo-CMC) and 4-methylumbelliferyl-cellobioside (4-MUC). Only the β-glucosidase showed high activity against 4-MUC. In contrast, all the plant-derived enzymes were active against the respective model substrates. Our data indicate that some enzymes of bacterial origin are more active and more efficiently expressed in plants than in a bacterial host.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 19%
Other 2 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Researcher 2 13%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 4 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Physics and Astronomy 1 6%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 4 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 December 2015.
All research outputs
#20,297,343
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#16,044
of 20,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#324,860
of 387,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#320
of 416 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,146 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 387,568 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 416 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.