Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research
  • Open Access

Genomic and proteomic analysis of lignin degrading and polyhydroxyalkanoate accumulating β-proteobacterium Pandoraea sp. ISTKB

  • 1,
  • 2,
  • 2,
  • 1,
  • 3,
  • 2Email author and
  • 1Email author
Biotechnology for Biofuels201811:154

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-018-1148-2

  • Received: 30 December 2017
  • Accepted: 17 May 2018
  • Published:

Abstract

Background

Lignin is a major component of plant biomass and is recalcitrant to degradation due to its complex and heterogeneous aromatic structure. The biomass-based research mainly focuses on polysaccharides component of biomass and lignin is discarded as waste with very limited usage. The sustainability and success of plant polysaccharide-based biorefinery can be possible if lignin is utilized in improved ways and with minimal waste generation. Discovering new microbial strains and understanding their enzyme system for lignin degradation are necessary for its conversion into fuel and chemicals. The Pandoraea sp. ISTKB was previously characterized for lignin degradation and successfully applied for pretreatment of sugarcane bagasse and polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) production. In this study, genomic analysis and proteomics on aromatic polymer kraft lignin and vanillic acid are performed to find the important enzymes for polymer utilization.

Results

Genomic analysis of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB revealed the presence of strong lignin degradation machinery and identified various candidate genes responsible for lignin degradation and PHA production. We also applied label-free quantitative proteomic approach to identify the expression profile on monoaromatic compound vanillic acid (VA) and polyaromatic kraft lignin (KL). Genomic and proteomic analysis simultaneously discovered Dyp-type peroxidase, peroxidases, glycolate oxidase, aldehyde oxidase, GMC oxidoreductase, laccases, quinone oxidoreductase, dioxygenases, monooxygenases, glutathione-dependent etherases, dehydrogenases, reductases, and methyltransferases and various other recently reported enzyme systems such as superoxide dismutases or catalase–peroxidase for lignin degradation. A strong stress response and detoxification mechanism was discovered. The two important gene clusters for lignin degradation and three PHA polymerase spanning gene clusters were identified and all the clusters were functionally active on KL–VA.

Conclusions

The unusual aerobic ‘-CoA’-mediated degradation pathway of phenylacetate and benzoate (reported only in 16 and 4–5% of total sequenced bacterial genomes), peroxidase-accessory enzyme system, and fenton chemistry based are the major pathways observed for lignin degradation. Both ortho and meta ring cleavage pathways for aromatic compound degradation were observed in expression profile. Genomic and proteomic approaches provided validation to this strain’s robust machinery for the metabolism of recalcitrant compounds and PHA production and provide an opportunity to target important enzymes for lignin valorization in future.

Keywords

  • Genomics
  • Lignin
  • Polyhydroxyalkanoate
  • Gene cluster
  • Label-free quantification
  • Vanillic acid

Background

The genus Pandoraea is a very recently classified genus proposed in the year 2000. Bacteria belonging to genus Pandoraea are Gram-negative, non-sporulating, and motile bacteria with single polar flagellum [1]. The genus belongs to Burkholderiaceae family and class β-proteobacteria. The Pandoraea genus was earlier misidentified and grouped together with Burkholderia or Ralstonia [1] This genus contains five species (Pandoraea pnomenusa, Pandoraea sputorum, Pandoraea norimbergensis, Pandoraea apista, and Pandoraea pulmonicola) and four genomospecies of thiosulfate-oxidizing (Pandoraea thiooxydans) and oxalate-oxidizing species as Pandoraea vervacti, Pandoraea faecigallinarum, and Pandoraea oxalativorans. Pandoraea is a taxonomically distinct genus having close similarity with Burkholderia and Ralstonia. Pandoraea has been isolated from various environments such as soil, landfill site, sediments, clinical samples (only P. apista, P. pnomenusa, and P. sputorum isolated until date), and water [14]. The Burkholderia and Ralstonia are very much explored and established genera with their promising potential environmental and industrial applications. Pandoraea is a relatively new genus, so there are very few findings available about their biotechnological potential. The species from this genus have been documented for utilization of polychlorinated biphenyl, dichloromethane, dyes, lignin, oxalate, thiosulfate, and quorum sensing [36]. At present, the genomic insights for Pandoraea are limiting and such studies would eventually help to widen the biotechnological prospective of this genus.

Lignin is a complex aromatic heteropolymer and it is the most abundant aromatic polymer available on earth. In nature, lignin is degraded mainly by bacteria and fungi. Fungi have been studied extensively for lignin degradation and only a few bacterial species have been reported for lignin degradation [7, 8]. Compared to fungi, bacteria offer advantage as its genome size is small, genetic manipulations, and large-scale recombinant expression of important enzymes can be performed with a greater ease. Therefore, the focus again shifted to bacteria for the identification of novel strains and enzymes for lignin degradation. The discovery of novel ligninolytic microbes, enzymes, and their biochemical characterization will help in deconstruction of biomass for their application in biofuel and bioproduct industry [6, 911]. The application of advanced ‘omics’ approach such as genomics, transcriptomics, and proteomics to individual microbial strains or microbial community will help in identification and functional characterization of novel ligninolytic enzymes in the near future [1214]. With the increase in genomic data of bacteria and fungi, the biomass degrading potential across different taxa can be identified that will further enhance our understanding related to lignin degradation [12, 13]. The lignin degrading bacterial isolate belongs to actinobacteria, alpha proteobacteria, beta proteobacteria, gamma proteobacteria, delta proteobacteria, bacteroides, and archaea [7]. The novel bacterial enzymes responsible for lignin degradation and their mechanism of action have also been described [15]. In recent years, LC–MS-based proteomics studies have been widely performed. Quantitative LC–MS-based proteomics such as label free and ITRAQ labeling-based quantification methods are generally used to identify the novel enzymes and their level of expression in a particular process [1618].

We have earlier sequenced the genome of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB and the sequence has been submitted to NCBI with accession number MAOS00000000.1 which is openly available [19]. In the present study, we describe the comprehensive analysis of the Pandoraea sp. ISTKB genome. The bioinformatics analysis was performed to identify a large set of genes and pathways putatively responsible for lignin degradation and PHA production. The important gene clusters responsible for lignin degradation and PHA production were also highlighted. This strain has already been shown to utilize monoaromatic lignin derivatives with great ease compared to polymeric kraft lignin for PHA production [20]. Therefore, the proteomic study of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB was performed for identification of set of a proteins expressed during its growth on monoaromatic vanillic acid (VA) and aromatic polymer lignin, i.e., kraft lignin (KL) that can be overexpressed for enhanced KL utilization. VA was selected, because most of the lignin linkages proceed through generation of vanillin or VA as nodal point during the course of degradation [21]. Proteomic studies provide insight into the protein profile and also complement the genomics analysis. Genomic and proteomic analyses would enable us to understand the novel enzymes and pathways responsible for lignin degradation and biovalorization.

Results

Salient features of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB genome

The Pandoraea sp. ISTKB was previously characterized for lignin degradation and successfully applied for pretreatment of sugarcane bagasse and polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) production [6, 20, 22]. The genome size of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB is 6.37 Mb with 65× coverage having GC content of 62.05%, 5356 predicted protein-coding genes [prokaryotic genome annotation pipeline (PGAP) and Pfam annotation] and the other general genome features has also been reported earlier [19]. Among the predicted proteins, 1740 proteins were categorized as hypothetical proteins. Out of total predicted proteins, 456 proteins were identified having signal sequences. Circular map displaying genomic features provides a space efficient and clear representation of gene arrangement on the genome, as shown in Fig. 1. The annotation of important genes and pathways related to lignin or aromatic compound degradation has also been represented in the circular plot. KEGG–KAAS pathway analysis of protein-coding genes from Pandoraea sp. ISTKB categorized 2590 genes in 22 different functional KAAS pathway (Additional file 1: Table S1). The KEGG predicted 148 proteins responsible for degradation and metabolism of aromatic and xenobiotic compound. The annotation and analysis by RAST predicted 5658 coding genes and 48% of coding genes have been classified into 26 subsystems features. The percent contribution of genes present in different functional groups in subsystem features is represented in Fig. 2. The subsystem features count showed dominance of general process related to carbohydrate, amino acids, cell wall components, prosthetics, cofactors, proteins, and lipid metabolism. After normal cellular processes, the subsystem feature count is dominated by membrane transport, aromatic compound metabolism, respiration stress response regulation, and cell signaling.
Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Circos plot of genes compared with the genome for Pandoraea sp. ISTKB. Circles from outside to inside represent; a scaffold arrangement, b gene position on the scaffolds, c GC skew, and d GC content. Syntenic representation of genes associated with the pathways and Pandoraea sp. ISTKB. Different genes associated with the selected pathways with different colors and shapes

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Classification of proteins in subsystem features and their abundance in different functional groups shown in Pandoraea sp. ISTKB

Gene ontology (GO) analysis was performed to gain functional information about predicted proteins in the genome. The analysis provided information about distribution of genes among various metabolic processes, cellular functions, and molecular components in the genome of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB (Fig. 3). In the biological processes, the organic substance metabolic process was found to be the dominant process. Molecular functions analysis revealed the major distribution of proteins into three important functions, i.e., organic cyclic compound binding, heterocyclic compound binding, and oxidoreductase activity. Abundance of ion binding and small molecule-binding proteins indicates their role in transcriptional regulation and transportation of molecules across cell membrane. Representation of transferase and hydrolase in good proportion indicates their assistance during metabolism of organic compounds.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3

GO analysis of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB genome and classification of genes into biological processes, cellular components, and molecular functions

Metabolism, respiratory mechanism, transporters, and transcriptional factors in Pandoraea sp. ISTKB genome

Pandoraea sp. ISTKB can metabolize diverse substrates; which includes five and six carbon sugar molecules. This bacterium can utilize monosaccharide (galactose, mannose, and fructose), disaccharides (sucrose), polysaccharides (starch), glucuronate, ascorbate, aldarate, amino sugar and nucleotide sugar, propionate, and butanoate metabolism. This strain can also utilize pentoses (xylose, xylulose), C5-branched dibasic acid, and other glyoxylate, dicarboxylate and pyruvate as predicted by KEGG. The growth of this strain was observed to be poor on glucose and the KEGG pathway analysis of carbohydrate metabolism also supported this observation. Analysis of respiratory mechanism showed various terminal electron acceptor, electron donors, and also other relevant genes related to respiration. The abundance of formate dehydrogenase, quinone oxidoreductase family proteins, oxidoreductases, ubiquinol oxidase, soluble cytochrome, and other related electron carriers highlights their importance and assistance in metabolism of various recalcitrant compounds (Additional file 1: Figure S1). There were 346 transcriptional factors identified in the genome, and among these regulators, LysR family was found to be dominant. Transcriptional regulator families related to metabolism of aromatic compound such as GntR, MarR, IclR, XRE, aromatic hydrocarbon utilization, anaerobic benzoate metabolism, and organic hydroperoxide regulators are also present in this strain (Additional file 1: Figure S2). There are 587 transporters identified in the genome, and among these, there were 279 ABC family transporters present. This family represents almost half of the total transporters present in the genome and was found to be dominant followed by two-component system and MFS transporters (Additional file 1: Figure S3).

Metabolism of aromatic compounds

The annotation of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB genes and their classification into pathways involved in lignin or aromatic compounds degradation have been identified by KEGG pathway analysis, blast search against ‘nr’ database, and subsystem feature of RAST. There were 42 dioxygenase, 25 monooxygenase, 17 peroxidase (including one DyP-type peroxidase), and 2 laccases discovered in genome (Additional file 1: Figure S4; Tables S2, S3, and S4). The presence of various oxidoreductase [grouped into FAD, NAD(P)H, SDR, GMC, YggW, quinone, pyridine nucleotide–disulfide, flavin, Fe–S, and unclassified oxidoreductases), reductases, dedydrogenases, esterases, thioesterases, transferases, and hydrolases has also been observed.

The pathway analysis revealed genes responsible for lignin degradation and diverse aromatic compound metabolism (Fig. 4). Genes responsible for funneling of lignin or aromatic components’ degradation through peripheral degradation pathways have been observed. Genes related to pathways for degradation of vanillin, ferulate, biphenyl, phenylpropanoic acid, benzoyl-CoA mediated, phenylacetate, and phenol were observed and their abundance is depicted in Fig. 4 and Additional file 1: Table S5. Subsystem feature analysis identified genes as ‘lignin degradation fragments’ responsible for lignin metabolism and this is discussed as cluster later section. The KEGG analysis indicates that this strain can utilize various xenobiotic compounds such as benzoate derivatives (amino, ethyl, p-hydroxy, and fluoro), BTX, salicylate esters, quinate, pesticides, PAHs, synthetic aromatic monomer, furfural, and steroids. The degradation of lignin and xenobiotic aromatic compounds results into generation of some restricted common central intermediates (catechol, protocatechuate, and gentisate) that are further metabolized by beta-ketoadipate and aromatic ring cleaving pathways. The genes responsible for degradation of central intermediates were identified in abundance (Fig. 4 and Additional file 1: Table S6). The genes observed in central intermediate pathways can metabolize common aromatic intermediates through both ortho and meta cleavage pathways [23]. The genes responsible for metabolism of central intermediates such as catechol, protocatechuate, salicylate, homogentisate, N-heterocyclic aromatic compound, and meta cleavage pathways were also identified.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4

Predicted lignin and aromatic compounds degradation genes and their number responsible for funneling into peripheral pathways and central intermediate metabolism

Identification of stress response genes, secondary metabolites, and genomic islands

Lignin or aromatic compound degradation requires concerted action of various oxidoreductases. The degradation process generates free radicals and reactive intermediates and their removal or transformation into stable and less toxic component is essential for cell survival. Genome analysis identified various proteins related to stress response and detoxification mechanisms (Additional file 1: Figure S5 and Table S7). The presence of superoxide dismutase, catalases, glutathione, thioredoxin, peroxiredoxins, glyoxylases, rubrerythrin, glutaredoxins, aldo/keto reductase, and alkyl hydroperoxidase highlights this strain’s arsenal against oxidative stress, protection from reactive species and detoxification of toxic components during aromatic metabolism [24, 25].

There are nine gene clusters identified in the genome of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB that has been represented with their contigs and position marked in Additional file 1: Table S8. Secondary metabolite cluster analysis identified some novel metabolites that are specific to Pandoraea sp. ISTKB. These clusters included genes responsible for the synthesis of terpenes, nonribosomal peptides, thailanstatin/mangotoxin, arylpropane, 2 homoserine lactone, phosphonate–terpene, bacteriocin, and lassopeptide. The cluster 9 (lassopeptide), cluster 2 (Nrps), and cluster 4 (arylpropane) were found to be unique to this strain, since cluster 9 did not show any match with Pandoraea genus or Burkholderia genus. However, clusters 2 and 4 showed only one match with Burkholderia. Clusters 1 (terpenes), 3 (thailanstatin/mangotoxin), and 5 (homoserine lactone) are distributed among Pandoraea and Burkholderia genus. Moreover, clusters 6 (phosphonate–terpene), 7 (bacteriocin), and 8 (homoserine lactone) are highly represented in Pandoraea genus. The novel clusters such as cluster 9 (lassopeptide), 2 (Nrps), and 4 (arylpropane) can prove to be significant as these are unique to this strain.

There were 12 genomic islands identified in the genome that are mainly dominated by the hypothetical proteins (Additional file 1: Figure S6 and Additional file 2: Table S9). The other proteins present were related to DNA replication, cell division and partitioning, transposition, recombination, phage-mediated integration, repair, and DNA-binding response regulators. There are various proteins identified in the island that plays important role in stress response, detoxification mechanism and their regulation, electron carrier, antibiotic resistance, metal resistance, and transportation of molecules across cell membrane. The proteins related to phosphate and sulfur metabolism and few for aromatic compound degradation were also observed.

Identification of gene clusters for the degradation lignin derivatives and PHA production

The two gene clusters responsible for degradation of lignin derivatives have been identified and the order of gene arrangement on the cluster is shown in Fig. 5a, b. The first cluster ‘lignin degradation fragment’ predicted by RAST contains genes responsible for protocatechuate meta cleavage-mediated degradation of lignin derivatives. The presence of LysR family transcriptional regulator for aromatics can be observed in the cluster. ABC transporters and MFS transporter were also present in this cluster that might be regulating the movement of aromatic compounds across the cell. The benzoyl formate decarboxylase present in the cluster is known for the degradation of benzene, xylene, and toluene. The second cluster contains genes mainly responsible for the degradation of vanillic acid. The presence of ABC transporters for regulating movement of molecules can also be observed in this cluster. This cluster also contains glutathione peroxidase, dehydrogenases, and glyoxylase that play important role in protection from oxidative damage by detoxifying reactive intermediates such as methylglyoxal and other aldehydes formed during metabolism of aromatic compounds [25].
Fig. 5
Fig. 5

Gene clusters with contig number 40.1 and 13.1 identified in Pandoraea genome responsible for lignin degradation represented as a and b. The size of DNA fragment selected for cluster analysis is between 12 and 17 Kb

PHA is carbon and energy reserve accumulated by microbes under nutrient imbalance condition [26]. We have earlier characterized PHA production by strain ISTKB while growing on lignin and its derivatives (as sole carbon source) and the genes responsible for PHA synthesis have been identified in the genome [20]. Here, the arrangement of PHA biosynthetic genes on cluster was analyzed in detail (Fig. 6a–c). The clusters were identified spanning PHA synthase or polymerase gene that is annotated in the genome. The first cluster revealed the presence of complete set of genes (acetoacetyl-CoA reductase, β-ketothiolase, PHA polymerase, and regulatory protein) responsible for short-chain PHA production. In case of second cluster, PHA polymerase was followed by acetoacetyl-CoA reductase but β-ketothiolase was missing from this cluster. The β-ketothiolase was present in multiple copies in the genome. This cluster is dominated by stress responsive proteins primarily related to heavy metal or multidrug efflux system. The third cluster contains only PHA synthetase and presence of genes predominantly related to oxidative stress as thiol-disulfide interchange protein, protein disulfide reductase, thioredoxin, two-component system response regulator protein, sensory proteins, secretory proteins, and ABC-type multidrug permeases was present around polymerase in the cluster.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6

Gene clusters with contig numbers 23.1, 34.1, and 48.1 identified in Pandoraea genome responsible for PHA production represented as ac. The size of DNA fragment selected for cluster analysis is between 12 and 17 Kb

Proteomics analysis on kraft lignin and vanillic acid

Proteomic analysis was performed to identify the genes expressed on monoaromatic compound vanillic acid and polyaromatic compound kraft lignin. The identification of important proteins responsible for polymeric lignin degradation and their overexpression will provide opportunity for lignin valorization. There were total 2484 proteins detected during LC–MS analysis covering almost 44.61% of the total protein-coding genes present in the genome. There were 2318 proteins common in both KL and VA and 166 proteins were found to be expressed either on KL or on VA. Among 166 expressed proteins, 74 were expressed on VA and 78 proteins on KL, as shown in Fig. 7a, b. GO analysis was performed on the protein expressed on KL and VA to obtain the overview of functional information about the proteins involved in various biological processes, cellular components, and molecular functions.
Fig. 7
Fig. 7

a Venn diagram showing total number of proteins expressed on kraft lignin and vanillic acid and their distribution among KL and VA. b Heat map showing differential expression of relevant proteins on kraft lignin–vanillic acid that are responsible for lignin degradation

The GO analysis of genomics was supported by proteomics (especially biological processes and molecular functions) on KL and VA (Fig. 8). The molecular functions category indicates an abundance of protein in catalytic activity, heterocyclic compound binding, organic compound binding, and transcription factor activity on KL and absent on VA. Single organism process was found to be dominant in KL and VA (after normal cellular and metabolic processes) indicates this strain specific process. The proteins involved in localization process on VA were almost double compared to KL. The membrane protein was present in KL and VA, but their representation on VA was found to be more than double as compared to KL and the transporters were also expressed more in VA.
Fig. 8
Fig. 8

GO analysis of protein expressed by Pandoraea sp. ISTKB while growing on KL and VA. The expressed proteins were classified into biological processes, cellular components, and molecular functions

Expressed proteins involved in lignin or aromatic compound degradation

Proteomic profile of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB revealed the presence of relevant proteins expressed only on KL or VA (Table 1) and KL–VA, as represented in Tables 2, 3, and 4. There are 17, 29, and 394 uncharacterized proteins observed in the KL, VA, and KL–VA, respectively. The various functionally active oxidoreductases, methyltransferases, hydrolases, isomerases, dehydrogenases, reductases, transferases, esterases, transporters, transcriptional factors, stress response, and detoxification-related proteins were observed that could play important role in degradation of lignin or aromatic compounds.
Table 1

Identification of relevant proteins expressed only on kraft lignin (KL) or vanillic acid (VL) that can assist in lignin degradation

Uniprot entry

Gene locus tag

Protein names

LFQ intensity KL

Razor + unique peptides KL

Sequence coverage (%)

Mol. weight (kDa)

Intensity

Relevant protein expressed only on kraft lignin (KL)

 A0A1E3LHD6

A9762_20370

Tryptophan 2,3-dioxygenase

22.9781

2

12.3

36.655

0.00043

 A0A1E3LB56

A9762_07750

Benzoyl-CoA oxygenase subunit B

28.4307

15

41.7

54.265

2.06E−87

 A0A1E3LET3

A9762_23815

Acriflavine resistance protein

22.5124

1

1.2

112.36

0.00162

 A0A1E3LL12

A9762_14780

Glycine betaine ABC transporter substrate-binding protein

23.8554

2

6.2

36.204

0.00036

 A0A1E3LI04

A9762_22630

Enoyl-CoA hydratase

23.5827

2

13.3

28.399

1.38E−14

 A0A1E3LPU3

A9762_13345

Pyruvate ferredoxin oxidoreductase

17.3225

3

4

129.05

0.00016

 A0A1E3LLU4

A9762_13050

Carboxyvinyl-carboxyphosphonate phosphorylmutase

24.4057

2

14.3

31.557

0.00039

 A0A1E3LBB9

A9762_07755

Benzoyl-CoA oxygenase/reductase, BoxA protein

23.9233

2

5

45.826

5.25E−07

 A0A1E3LGI4

A9762_03990

SAM-dependent methyltransferase

24.6086

2

9.6

31.525

1.73E−06

 A0A1E3LDW7

A9762_25245

(2Fe–2S)-binding protein

24.4339

2

24.5

20.242

2.06E−06

 A0A1E3LNU5

A9762_10215

LysR family transcriptional regulator

23.5144

2

8.4

33.65

4.15E−07

 A0A1E3LEP7

A9762_23880

Phenylacetic acid degradation protein

24.5346

3

12.4

39.494

4.34E−14

 A0A1E3LJ38

A9762_17050

ABC transporter

26.2152

5

18.3

32.972

3.46E−34

 A0A1E3LB77

A9762_07880

ABC transporter ATP-binding protein

24.5787

2

9.7

25.723

2.69E−12

 A0A1E3LF42

A9762_23860

1,2-Phenylacetyl-CoA epoxidase subunit A (monooxygenase)

25.5084

4

14

37.739

4.64E−20

 A0A1E3LGK2

A9762_23865

1,2-Phenylacetyl-CoA epoxidase subunit B (monooxygenase)

24.5067

2

20.4

11.224

6.77E−06

 A0A1E3LHG4

A9762_23220

Formyl-CoA:oxalate CoA transferase

26.7341

5

17.8

45.737

4.76E−34

 A0A1E3LNE1

A9762_10935

Salicylate hydroxylase

22.5412

1

3.1

41.287

0.00183

 A0A1E3LF93

A9762_23590

Ligand-gated channel protein

24.4315

2

3.4

81.344

8.95E−05

 A0A1E3LHJ6

A9762_19845

NADPH:quinone reductase

23.3346

1

3.1

31.317

0.00029

 A0A1E3LIQ8

A9762_17970

Glycolate oxidase subunit GlcE

24.8966

2

7.3

40.542

3.71E−10

 A0A1E3LEZ8

A9762_23215

2-Hydroxyhepta-2,4-diene-1,7-dioate isomerase

24.1273

2

14.8

27.8

1.39E−06

Relevant protein expressed only on vanillic acid (VA)

 A0A1E3LRS2

A9762_00545

Alkene reductase

26.4047

7

29.1

39.612

3.91E−37

 A0A1E3LLI9

A9762_02605

Alpha/beta hydrolase

25.8742

4

23.2

30.983

3.92E−11

 A0A1E3LLX9

A9762_03340

Tol-pal system-associated acyl-CoA thioesterase

24.2249

2

14.4

17.548

2.38E−05

 A0A1E3LDT8

A9762_25265

Acetyltransferase

24.2249

2

14.4

17.548

2.38E−05

 A0A1E3LPL0

A9762_01420

Glutathione S-transferase

24.4839

2

15.3

24.629

2.35E−07

 A0A1E3LCR5

A9762_26030

Aminomethyltransferase

25.197

2

11

34.276

8.63E−05

 A0A1E3LPI9

A9762_13065

Methyltransferase

22.991

2

7.7

29.85

1.53E−06

 A0A1E3LEN5

A9762_06460

Rieske (2Fe–2S) protein

25.0064

1

6.5

43.065

1.25E−08

 A0A1E3LHR2

A9762_19260

Glycine/betaine ABC transporter permease

24.0824

1

4.9

25.659

0.0001153

Table 2

Differentially expressed proteins for phenylacetic acid, benzene degradation, and various oxidoreductases on kraft lignin

Uniprot IDs

Locus tag

Name

Log2 fold change

Unique peptides

Sequence coverage (%)

Mol. weight (kDa)

Intensity

  

Phenylacetic acid degradation protein

     

A0A1E3LF26

A9762_23720

Phenylacetic acid degradation protein PaaD

0.529261

3

27.3

15.022

8.65E−26

A0A1E3LF48

A9762_23735

Phenylacetic acid degradation protein PaaN

0.244067

18

58.3

60.008

1.24E−140

A0A1E3LFB3

A9762_23725

2-(1,2-Epoxy-1,2-dihydrophenyl)acetyl-CoA isomerase

0.724358

9

56.1

27.854

1.32E−76

A0A1E3LFJ2

A9762_22495

Phenylacetic acid degradation protein

0.790541

4

36.3

15.888

3.07E−15

A0A1E3LHE3

A9762_23715

Phenylacetate–coenzyme A

0.514503

14

57.5

47.386

1.43E−109

A0A1E3LQE8

A9762_10500

Phenylacetic acid degradation protein

1.426558

5

44.4

14.521

5.16E−22

  

Peroxidases

     

A0A1E3LDX8

A9762_24250

Dyp-type peroxidase

1.43239

15

72

40.756

1.29E−104

A0A1E3LHN8

A9762_20355

Peroxidase

− 1.69967

18

90.6

23.753

0

A0A1E3LPA6

A9762_00985

Chloroperoxidase

− 1.927944

16

84.7

30.075

8.73E−175

A0A1E3LF97

A9762_25345

Peroxidase-like protein

1.353771

7

59

18.981

4.85E−31

A0A1E3LNE3

A9762_13620

Laccase

− 0.13346

10

57.5

28.644

5.45E−43

  

Oxidases

     

A0A1E3LC86

A9762_26490

Glycolate oxidase subunit GlcE

1.96696

9

38.1

38.774

4.18E−40

A0A1E3LDU3

A9762_25250

Aldehyde oxidase

1.94888

25

43.2

106.43

3.40E−153

A0A1E3LG04

A9762_25240

Cytochrome C oxidase Cbb3

1.88749

12

44.8

44.919

5.64E−68

A0A1E3LL61

A9762_17965

Glycolate oxidase iron–sulfur subunit

1.88269

5

14.3

46.4

1.56E−20

A0A1E3LCC6

A9762_07195

Oxidase

1.12594

23

67.7

43.498

4.04E−279

A0A1E3LQ45

A9762_00290

FAD-linked oxidase

0.7576

46

47.6

148.68

8.22E−260

A0A1E3LDS7

A9762_25555

Ubiquinol oxidase subunit 2

− 0.72481

3

21.5

35.767

2.50E−21

A0A1E3LLY2

A9762_16250

l-Aspartate oxidase

− 1.51593

5

14.2

58.534

1.25E−24

A0A1E3LRG9

A9762_02095

Cytochrome c oxidase assembly protein

− 1.76256

6

49.8

22.192

2.52E−27

A0A1E3LCR8

A9762_26505

2-Hydroxy-acid oxidase

− 1.92172

13

43.3

51.242

1.38E−99

  

Oxidoreductases

     

A0A1E3L9T7

A9762_09290

NADH–quinone oxidoreductase subunit I

1.983

13

54.6

18.63

1.26E−66

A0A1E3LC99

A9762_26255

Oxidoreductase

1.46342

9

62.5

26.21

1.99E−100

A0A1E3LAC9

A9762_09275

NADH oxidoreductase (quinone) subunit F

0.86275

19

70.7

47.093

5.72E−135

A0A1E3LMK8

A9762_03120

NADP oxidoreductase

0.82498

10

55.5

32.458

3.02E−38

A0A1E3LHK5

A9762_23470

FAD-dependent oxidoreductase

0.33833

3

14.7

38.458

4.28E−15

A0A1E3LLW4

A9762_03220

GMC family oxidoreductase

0.24372

23

54.8

64.908

3.74E−163

A0A1E3LFG3

A9762_22500

NADP-dependent oxidoreductase

0.05857

13

63.4

35.64

5.98E−106

A0A1E3LKB2

A9762_03335

Oxidoreductase

− 0.24038

18

82.3

31.785

3.07E−157

A0A1E3LGB9

A9762_21450

YggW family oxidoreductase

− 0.68269

3

10.3

45.723

1.71E−14

A0A1E3LC87

A9762_26930

Fe–S oxidoreductase

− 1.47441

6

49.8

26.119

2.01E−34

A0A1E3LG91

A9762_21265

Vanillate O-demethylase ferredoxin subunit

− 1.5017

15

57.9

33.723

1.13E−114

A0A1E3LG83

A9762_21255

Vanillate O-demethylase oxidoreductase

0.298001

15

48.1

50.745

1.80E−76

A0A1E3LFZ4

A9762_25310

FAD-dependent oxidoreductase

− 1.67016

5

17.9

54.42

2.53E−15

A0A1E3LA58

A9762_09270

NADH-quinone oxidoreductase subunit E

− 1.69506

9

80.1

18.129

9.41E−90

A0A1E3LFR2

A9762_22175

Oxidoreductase

− 1.8627

9

61.8

30.679

4.89E−178

A0A1E3LCB2

A9762_09255

NADH-quinone oxidoreductase subunit B

− 1.96385

10

72.3

17.519

1.56E−64

A0A1E3LEJ8

A9762_05735

Oxidoreductase

− 1.97509

18

85.7

26.372

6.17E−220

A0A1E3LKX1

A9762_15740

Quinone oxidoreductase

− 1.99406

18

90.7

34.556

1.06E−219

  

Oxygenases

     

A0A1E3LHN5

A9762_23090

2-Nitropropane dioxygenase

1.84558

3

15.1

38.789

7.50E−15

A0A1E3LFU3

A9762_22350

Quercetin 2,3-dioxygenase

1.82796

7

51.5

26.31

4.21E−24

A0A1E3LFX1

A9762_21815

Homogentisate 1,2-dioxygenase

1.51818

13

56.9

48.611

5.10E−81

A0A1E3LPA9

A9762_00970

4-Hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase

1.43964

2

5.9

40.191

3.14E−09

A0A1E3LFB4

A9762_23095

2-Nitropropane dioxygenase

1.31977

9

45.1

39.332

6.27E−61

A0A1E3LDU6

A9762_24595

Phytanoyl-CoA dioxygenase

− 0.60384

6

38.3

27.846

2.72E−52

A0A1E3LF51

A9762_25450

Putative dioxygenase

− 0.666263

9

88.7

15.676

1.86E−122

A0A1E3LIM3

A9762_17955

Dioxygenase

− 0.91661

8

52

29.958

6.54E−31

A0A1E3LI70

A9762_22255

2-Nitropropane dioxygenase

− 1.45193

12

64.4

33.509

1.71E−146

A0A1E3LIR0

A9762_17450

Protocatechuate 3,4-dioxygenase subunit alpha

− 1.63442

13

83.4

21.895

2.50E−246

A0A1E3LJ07

A9762_17445

Protocatechuate 3,4-dioxygenase subunit beta

− 1.71052

16

78.4

26.513

2.43E−152

A0A1E3LG93

A9762_21285

Protocatechuate 4,5-dioxygenase subunit alpha

− 1.83931

6

80.7

13.769

6.11E−47

A0A1E3LG93

A9762_21285

Protocatechuate 4,5-dioxygenase subunit beta

− 1.83931

6

80.7

13.769

6.11E−47

A0A1E3LEL8

A9762_04935

Antibiotic biosynthesis monooxygenase

− 1.86712

6

81.8

11.026

1.02E−172

A0A1E3LBV9

A9762_07570

2OG-Fe(II) oxygenase

− 1.682965

7

50.7

30.695

9.21E−31

A0A1E3LL67

A9762_14910

2OG-Fe(II) oxygenase

− 0.037474

8

43

37.152

3.47E−45

  

Benzoate degradation

     

A0A1E3LBS0

A9762_08405

2-Aminobenzoate–CoA ligase

1.569646

5

15.2

59.58

4.06E−18

A0A1E3LF67

A9762_23480

3-Octaprenyl-4-hydroxybenzoate carboxy-lyase (Fragment)

− 1.471879

4

32.4

15.528

1.01E−27

A0A1E3LLJ4

A9762_17745

3-Octaprenyl-4-hydroxybenzoate carboxy-lyase

1.567849

11

32.8

57.345

1.54E−68

A0A1E3LM76

A9762_12465

2-Nonaprenyl-3-methyl-6-methoxy-1,4-benzoquinol hydroxylase

− 1.895105

5

47.4

23.511

1.50E−34

A0A1E3LDW9

A9762_24905

Carboxymethylenebutenolidase

− 1.707803

8

49

27.008

1.57E−119

A0A1E3LDA6

A9762_06440

Carboxymethylenebutenolidase

− 1.951469

18

77

31.135

1.41E−118

Table 3

Differentially expressed antioxidant and stress response proteins on kraft lignin

Uniprot IDs

Locus tag

Name

Log2 fold change

Unique peptides

Sequence coverage (%)

Mol. weight (kDa)

Intensity

  

Glutathione enzymes

     

A0A1E3LF33

A9762_23395

Glutathione ABC transporter substrate-binding protein

1.80871

29

77.1

57.261

0

A0A1E3LKY8

A9762_17040

Glutathione S-transferase

1.18746

8

41.1

24.027

3.57E−36

A0A1E3LF68

A9762_25435

Glutathione S-transferase

0.61286

8

65.2

22.821

1.27E−72

A0A1E3LBR6

A9762_09395

Glutathione S-transferase

0.55477

4

25.7

24.666

5.23E−14

A0A1E3LQD9

A9762_10375

Glutathione S-transferase

0.51263

5

37.8

27.794

1.84E−17

A0A1E3LFJ0

A9762_24585

Glutathione-disulfide reductase

0.35879

22

63.6

48.837

7.37E−222

A0A1E3LI91

A9762_18915

Glutathione S-transferase

0.05437

5

39

25.252

2.31E − 26

A0A1E3LP56

A9762_00695

Glutathione S-transferase

− 0.96784

8

53.6

23.768

4.31E−48

A0A1E3LI39

A9762_18265

Glutathione S-transferase

− 1.44982

18

82.3

23.728

3.01E−285

A0A1E3LAC5

A9762_09365

Glutathione S-transferase

− 1.70035

15

72.6

26.078

1.22E−149

A0A1E3LPY3

A9762_02245

Glutathione synthetase

− 1.79520

21

82.4

34.566

2.19E−195

A0A1E3LL68

A9762_15125

Glutathione S-transferase

− 1.85572

4

21

23.996

5.81E−18

A0A1E3LI75

A9762_04000

Lactoylglutathione lyase

− 1.97244

4

64.5

14.032

1.22E−30

A0A1E3LBC2

A9762_08325

Hydroxyacylglutathione hydrolase

− 1.98082

10

57.5

29.087

5.85E−75

A0A1E3LC63

A9762_26475

Glutathione peroxidase

1.59171

9

82.6

18.506

1.18E−57

A0A1E3LN82

A9762_11030

Glutathione peroxidase

− 1.47148

10

55.2

19.852

3.04E−128

A0A1E3LL32

A9762_17770

S-(Hydroxymethyl)glutathione dehydrogenase

− 1.97881

22

83.7

39.609

5.20E−235

A0A1E3LCG8

A9762_26430

S-Formylglutathione hydrolase

− 1.5565

9

49.6

31.49

2.83E−45

  

Catalases

     

A0A1E3LJG2

A9762_17205

Catalase

− 1.90503

31

69.7

55.065

0

A0A1E3LHV5

A9762_19890

Catalase

1.96803

20

58.3

54.314

2.70E−159

A0A1E3LL41

A9762_15065

Catalase

1.96803

20

58.3

54.314

2.70E−159

  

Superoxide dismutase

     

A0A1E3LHJ2

A9762_20590

Superoxide dismutase

− 1.97424

2

12.2

22.201

8.04E−07

A0A1E3LJK7

A9762_16420

Superoxide dismutase

− 1.6319

16

93.2

21.3

0

  

Thioredoxin

     

A0A1E3LA95

A9762_09775

Thioredoxin

1.50102

6

68.5

11.693

1.86E−50

A0A1E3LIM9

A9762_21500

Thioredoxin

0.26594

13

64

30.297

2.12E−120

A0A1E3LMC9

A9762_12720

Probable thiol peroxidase

− 1.29118

15

95.8

17.552

1.19E−229

A0A1E3LK52

A9762_19935

Thioredoxin reductase

− 0.42918

12

71.1

33.796

6.61E−169

  

Peroxiredoxin

     

A0A1E3LFM2

A9762_22670

Peroxiredoxin

0.06241

4

27.7

19.976

2.59E−09

A0A1E3LG33

A9762_25080

Peroxiredoxin

− 0.7565

5

51.9

17.411

3.34E−34

A0A1E3LIX5

A9762_17525

Peroxiredoxin

1.63617

11

84.5

20.829

4.52E−87

A0A1E3LNW8

A9762_00130

Peroxiredoxin

− 1.41372

5

35

14.926

1.51E−22

  

Glyoxylase

     

A0A1E3LJS5

A9762_02855

Glyoxalase

1.90407

4

26.4

24.933

1.26E−10

A0A1E3LML8

A9762_12845

Glyoxalase

− 1.55877

4

40.7

15.609

4.05E−12

  

Glutaredoxin

     

A0A1E3LF15

A9762_23485

Glutaredoxin

− 0.65795

4

51.9

11.612

1.33E−69

A0A1E3LQ32

A9762_02205

Glutaredoxin 3

1.02376

8

79.1

9.8904

4.95E−60

  

Alkylperoxide reductase

     

A0A1E3LAL5

A9762_08705

Alkyl hydroperoxide reductase

− 1.92917

10

79.1

16.924

2.59E−121

A0A1E3LDK0

A9762_25350

Alkyl hydroperoxide reductase AhpD

1.76395

5

40.7

22.242

5.04E−30

A0A1E3LCA5

A9762_26215

Alkyl hydroperoxide reductase AhpD

− 1.58398

5

49.5

19.7

1.06E−56

A0A1E3LGT9

A9762_04630

Alkyl hydroperoxide reductase AhpD

− 0.87073

6

67.7

14.207

2.45E−17

A0A1E3LKG5

A9762_16100

Alkyl hydroperoxide reductase AhpD

− 1.52586

9

64.9

21.888

2.68E−61

A0A1E3LLQ8

A9762_13730

Alkyl hydroperoxide reductase AhpD

− 0.29909

10

77.7

18.588

4.23E−101

A0A1E3LLX0

A9762_13735

Alkyl hydroperoxide reductase

− 0.30453

16

85.7

20.001

0

Table 4

Differentially expressed reductase, dehydrogenase, transferase, and hydratase proteins on kraft lignin

Uniprot IDs

Locus tag

Name

Log2 fold change

Unique peptides

Sequence coverage (%)

Mol. weight (kDa)

Intensity

  

Reductases

     

A0A1E3LM36

A9762_03695

Aldo/keto reductase

− 1.446536

54

95.1

38.448

0

A0A1E3LPJ8

A9762_01385

Aldo/keto reductase

− 1.811371

8

43.3

37.797

1.87E−50

A0A1E3LS07

A9762_01040

Aldo/keto reductase

0.040585

20

73.6

30.685

1.63E−183

A0A1E3LG16

A9762_22220

Glyoxylate/hydroxypyruvate reductase A

1.99991

14

69.4

33.941

4.47E−124

A0A1E3LQJ8

A9762_00050

Bifunctional glyoxylate/hydroxypyruvate reductase B

− 0.601011

20

82.2

34.525

1.34E−204

A0A1E3LI17

A9762_19295

Alkene reductase

− 0.075801

28

92

40.61

0

A0A1E3LIA9

A9762_18295

2-Alkenal reductase

0.117504

12

46.4

42.805

2.10E−74

A0A1E3LDX7

A9762_24675

Ferredoxin–NADP(+) reductase

1.250238

18

77

29.272

3.54E−106

A0A1E3LFT3

A9762_21855

NADPH-dependent FMN reductase

− 0.973988

9

69.1

19.818

1.98E−77

A0A1E3LAB2

A9762_08440

NADPH:quinone reductase

− 1.850827

14

71.9

36.075

3.86E−109

A0A1E3LQJ8

A9762_00050

Hydroxypyruvate reductase B

− 0.601011

20

82.2

34.525

1.34E−204

A0A1E3LLZ7

A9762_13130

Fumarate reductase

1.805886

2

7.4

52.225

7.89E−05

  

Dehydrogenases

     

A0A1E3LDJ7

A9762_25850

Formate dehydrogenase subunit beta

1.664541

6

23.2

34.213

1.25E−22

A0A1E3LDC4

A9762_25845

Formate dehydrogenase-N subunit alpha

1.414862

16

34.2

90.668

3.91E−102

A0A1E3LDS6

A9762_24610

Formate dehydrogenase

0.761355

2

57.1

8.7799

3.84E−22

A0A1E3LE53

A9762_24625

Formate dehydrogenase

1.257519

9

30

56.957

3.45E−62

A0A1E3LG97; A0A1E3LF08

A9762_24620

Formate dehydrogenase subunit alpha

1.020855

21

34

104.98

1.29E−121

A0A1E3LL63

A9762_15395

NADH dehydrogenase

0.064345

9

60.8

21.897

5.70E−49

A0A1E3LPJ3

A9762_01450

Aldehyde dehydrogenase

1.745055

17

54.5

52.735

1.72E−105

A0A1E3LJ61

A9762_20360

Acyl-CoA dehydrogenase

0.210716

11

46.1

43.33

1.22E−90

A0A1E3LH50

A9762_22885

Alcohol dehydrogenase

0.448181

14

55.4

40.556

1.68E−67

A0A1E3LGE7

A9762_21150

Aldehyde dehydrogenase

0.513856

4

14.4

51.073

1.64E−12

A0A1E3LFY2

A9762_21880

NAD(FAD)-utilizing dehydrogenase

1.806462

3

12.9

42.366

7.90E−09

A0A1E3LF76

A9762_23430

Acyl-CoA dehydrogenase

0.067218

9

31.6

40.901

1.33E−56

A0A1E3LKN0

A9762_15340

Acyl-CoA dehydrogenase

− 1.0527852

7

24.4

41.792

1.04E−41

A0A1E3LP12

A9762_00210

Acyl-CoA dehydrogenase

− 0.467758

37

72.4

65.029

0

A0A1E3LKM0

A9762_16035

NAD(P)H dehydrogenase (quinone)

− 1.786348

11

55.7

22.107

2.74E−162

A0A1E3LKB6

A9762_03215

Alcohol dehydrogenase

− 1.58185

16

63.3

44.426

1.36E−99

A0A1E3LJV2

A9762_02775

Putative NADH dehydrogenase

− 0.256436

15

86.3

21.594

1.71E−184

A0A1E3LIB8

A9762_18460

Short-chain dehydrogenase

− 1.862879

2

13.3

26.395

8.23E−08

A0A1E3LI49

A9762_22120

Short-chain dehydrogenase

− 1.335172

6

29.3

24.127

2.78E−23

A0A1E3LI38

A9762_22070

Short-chain dehydrogenase

− 1.826239

3

15.2

29.599

1.04E−17

A0A1E3LHQ0

A9762_20005

Dehydrogenase

− 0.022626

13

53.6

38.384

2.57E−91

A0A1E3LHP2

A9762_20015

Aldehyde dehydrogenase

− 0.39059

15

63.3

51.925

2.00E−131

A0A1E3LHJ3

A9762_19710

Short-chain dehydrogenase

− 0.299807

5

32.7

26.91

1.68E−19

A0A1E3LLS1

A9762_17065

Short-chain dehydrogenase

− 1.1228889

10

50.4

29.165

2.51E−85

A0A1E3LFZ7

A9762_24160

Acyl-CoA dehydrogenase

− 1.977129

8

13.2

90.723

3.27E−24

A0A1E3LFV1

A9762_21935

Alcohol dehydrogenase

− 0.223075

15

71.1

36.536

2.10E−159

A0A1E3LF72

A9762_23085

NADPH:quinone dehydrogenase

− 1.970038

12

66.5

34.703

2.88E−132

A0A1E3LE86

A9762_05015

Short-chain dehydrogenase

− 0.122157

19

90.8

26.28

1.25E−173

A0A1E3LE78

A9762_24110

Short-chain dehydrogenase

− 1.0213605

8

59.1

24.582

6.63E−39

A0A1E3LE10

A9762_24765

Aldehyde dehydrogenase

− 0.713344

26

69.6

50.552

2.84E−236

A0A1E3LDF9

A9762_25465

Short-chain dehydrogenase

− 1.0369092

18

82.1

26.766

0

A0A1E3LCV6

A9762_26070

Acyl-CoA dehydrogenase

− 0.559374

33

78.2

63.6

0

A0A1E3LCK3

A9762_26745

Aldehyde dehydrogenase

− 1.998458

41

82.4

55.098

0

A0A1E3LCD2

A9762_09370

Acyl-CoA dehydrogenase

− 0.349182

10

31.9

45.179

6.63E−43

  

Transferase and hydratase

     

A0A1E3LDE2

A9762_25255

Acetyltransferase

1.1424203

5

42.2

19.294

9.45E−19

A0A1E3LEG1

A9762_24350

Acyl-CoA transferase

− 1.894681

5

23.8

49.528

1.44E−09

A0A1E3LE25

A9762_26525

Acyltransferase

− 0.658173

11

53.7

31.029

2.25E−127

A0A1E3LCY1

A9762_06345

CoA transferase

− 1.644591

5

19.7

43.746

5.43E−17

A0A1E3LAQ8

A9762_09850

Formyl-CoA transferase

1.63564

16

57

43.01

7.70E−140

A0A1E3LEY2

A9762_23230

Formyl-CoA:oxalate CoA transferase

1.480644

23

65.9

45.431

4.87E−142

A0A1E3LF20

A9762_25975

N-Hydroxyarylamine O-acetyltransferase

− 0.812216

13

68.8

31.71

1.16E−71

A0A1E3LB74

A9762_08395

Enoyl-CoA hydratase

0.844962

4

17.4

30.92

1.3832E−11

A0A1E3LG06

A9762_22140

Enoyl-CoA hydratase

− 0.845624

7

39.9

28.125

5.7526E−122

A0A1E3LD66

A9762_27340

Enoyl-CoA hydratase

1.887871

9

53.1

29.49

1.5759E−26

A0A1E3LNX6

A9762_00200

Acetyl-CoA acetyltransferase

− 0.329002

26

92.5

41.664

0

A0A1E3LED2

A9762_24145

Acetyl-CoA acetyltransferase

− 0.647329

11

34.2

46.667

5.8563E−44

A0A1E3LFL9

A9762_22115

Acetyl-CoA acetyltransferase

− 1.992637

21

75.9

40.895

0

A0A1E3LLK2

A9762_13635

Acetyl-CoA acetyltransferase

− 1.672549

24

85

40.687

0

A0A1E3LLN7

A9762_13660

Acetyl-CoA acetyltransferase

− 1.969308

20

70.5

41.273

0

A0A1E3LFA3

A9762_23740

Enoyl-CoA hydratase

− 1.935441

19

86.8

28.063

8.927E−161

A0A1E3LNG2

A9762_11320

Enoyl-CoA hydratase

0.497127

6

36.4

27.805

7.4808E−33

A0A1E3LNH0

A9762_11445

Enoyl-CoA hydratase

− 1.83413

8

45.4

29.067

2.3968E−55

A0A1E3LNY9

A9762_00195

Enoyl-CoA hydratase

− 0.4152

17

84.7

27.622

1.6359E−146

Important proteins expressed either on kraft lignin or on vanillic acid

The analysis of expression profile on KL revealed the presence of 1,2-phenylacetyl-CoA epoxidase (monooxygenase), phenylacetic acid degradation protein, and 2-hydroxyhepta-2,4-diene-1,7-dioate isomerase enzymes for the degradation of phenylacetate. Proteins such as benzoyl-CoA oxygenase, enoyl-CoA hydratase, tryptophan 2,3-dioxygenase, and salicylate hydroxylase were also active on KL. Proteins for methyl group transfer and decarboxylation such as SAM-dependent methyltransferase, pyruvate ferredoxin oxidoreductase, and (2Fe–2S)-binding protein were also observed. Generation of reactive intermediates and their detoxification by oxidative stress-resistance protein glycolate oxidase and NADPH:quinone reductase was present. Glycine betaine ABC transporter substrate-binding protein and formyl-CoA:oxalate CoA-transferase (FCOCT) proteins for osmoprotection and acid response regulator were present to maintain the smooth functioning of intracellular environment. There were six LysR family, two unclassified and one each of GntR family, AsnC family, Cd(II)/Pb(II)-responsive, Crp/Fnr family, MarR, and MerR transcriptional regulator found on KL. The VA was mainly dominated by transporters and stress response proteins [glutathione S-transferase, Rieske (2Fe–2S) protein, thioesterase, glycine betaine permease, and alkene reductase]. One methyltransferases, aminomethyltransferase, and LysR family transcriptional regulator were also observed.

Proteins differentially expressed on kraft lignin and vanillic acid

There were 1979 proteins obtained on KL–VA after normalization, and among these, 1110 proteins upregulated and 869 downregulated on kraft lignin. There are 164 transporters detected out of which 127 are ABC, 5 RND, and 4 MFS. There are 163 transcription factors identified comparising 34 LysR family, 21 GntR family, 17 tetR family, 12 each MarR, and IcIR family. We are discussing here important proteins that can perform lignin degradation and transformation. Some of the differentially expressed proteins that may involve in prospective lignin degradation are shown in Fig. 7b. The presence of various oxidoreductases, dehydrogenase, reductases, transferases, PHA biosynthetic proteins, and several stress response and detoxification proteins was detected in the expression profile. The phenylacetic acid degradation protein and ‘CoA’-mediated degradation of phenylacetate, phenylpropionate, and benzoate proteins were found to be upregulated on kraft lignin. The DyP-type peroxidase, peroxidase-like proteins, and various accessory enzymes such as aldehyde oxidase, glycolate oxidase, cytochrome C oxidase, oxidase, NADH:quinone oxidoreductase, FAD-linked oxidase, and GMC family oxidoreductase were found to be upregulated on KL. GMC family oxidoreductase or aryl alcohol oxidase is also known as auxiliary enzymes in case of fungi and their role is established in lignin degradation [27]. The homogentisate 1,2-dioxygenase, quercetin 2,3-dioxygenase, 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase, dioxygenase, and nitropropane dioxygenase were found to be upregulated on KL. There were six SAM-dependent methyltransferase and one methyltransferase identified on KL–VA. Four SAM-dependent methyl transferase and methyltransferase was upregulated on KL and two SAM-dependent methyltransferase was upregulated on VA.

The expression of antioxidant and stress response proteins glutathione peroxidase, glutathione-disulfide reductase, catalase, glyoxylase, thioredoxin, peroxiredoxin, alkyl hydroperoxide reductase, aldo/keto reductase, and glutathione S-transferases was upregulated in case of KL. Superoxide dismutase was downregulated in case of KL and catalases were downregulated on VA. The proteins formyl-coA transferase, formate dehydrogenase for oxalate, and formate metabolism were also found to be upregulated on KL. Various other dehydrogenases, reductases, and transferases such as hydroxypyruvate reductase, NAD dehydrogenase, alcohol dehydrogenase, aldehyde dehydrogenase, ferredoxin reductase, ferredoxin, acyl-CoA dehydrogenase, acetyltransferases, and enoyl-CoA hydratase, were upregulated on KL.

The expression of vanillate O-demethylase oxidoreductase, chloroperoxidase, hydroglutathione hydrolase, protocatechuate 3,4-dioxygenase, protocatechuate 4,5-dioxygenase, 2OG-Fe(II) oxygenase, antibiotic synthesis monooxygenase, 2-hydroxyl acid oxidase, cytochrome c oxidase, NADH quinone oxidoreductase, glutathione peroxidase, and other oxidoreductases was upregulated in case of VA. The expression of protocatechuate 4,5-dioxygenase was more than double compared to protocatechuate 3,4-dioxygenase on VA. Compared to KL, the expression of oxidases enzymes was very less on VA. The expression of laccase, FAD-dependent oxidoreductase, phytanoyl-CoA dioxygenase, YggW family oxidoreductase, ubiquinol oxidase, one glutathione S-transferase, and NADH quinone oxidoreductase, was almost same in both KL and VA. There were several NADH:quinone oxidoreductases observed in KL–VA and some are upregulated in KL other in VA. Short-chain dehydrogenase, acyl-CoA dehydrogenase, alcohol dehydrogenase, acyltransferase, alkene reductase, FMN reductase, NADH:quinone reductase, and acetyl-CoA acetyl transferase was found to be upregulated on VA.

The clusters predicted for lignin degradation and PHA production were found to functionally active and the genes for degradation of lignin derivatives as well as all the three PHA polymerase were present in the expression profile (Additional file 3: Table S10, also contains other dehydrogenase, reductases, transferases, esterases, thioesterases, hydrolases not discussed here but expressed on KL–VA). The PHA production was induced on both the substrate, i.e., kraft lignin and vanillic acid. The activation of PHA biosynthetic genes on lignin was also recently reported [17].

Discussion

The detail of genomic and proteomic studies of lignin degrading bacterium is limited, so we tried to provide the comprehensive genomic and proteomic analysis of lignin degrading bacterium Pandoraea sp. ISTKB. The genome size of this genus available in NCBI varies between 4.4 and 6.5 Mb and this strain’s genome is one of the largest genome sequences available until date from Pandoraea genus. The degradation of aromatic compounds by bacteria is mostly aerobic and is tightly regulated process. Their degradation by oxidoreductases generates reactive intermediates, so a robust stress response and detoxification mechanism is required for survival of microbes. The dominance of these subsystem features such as respiration, aromatic metabolism, and stress response (after normal cellular processes) and their complementation highlights the ability of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB to survive and metabolize lignin or aromatic compound.

The GO analysis especially biological process and molecular functions indeed supported this strain’s robust genomic machinery for the utilization of organic substance, organic cyclic compounds, heterocyclic compound binding, solute binding, ion binding, and oxidoreductase activity. The abundance of localization process proteins, membrane proteins, and transporters in VA as compared to KL can be explained that these proteins might be localized near the membrane and actively involved in transportation and metabolism of VA into the cell. The absence of proteins in VA for organic cyclic compound binding, heterocyclic compound binding, iron–sulfur cluster binding, receptor activity, ion binding, cofactor binding, small molecule binding, and their presence in KL suggests that these are the important molecular functions’ category proteins that would have facilitated the depolymerization and utilization of polymer KL by this strain.

The analysis of expression profile on KL indicates the presence of metacleavage and unusual pathways, i.e., ‘-CoA’-mediated degradation of lignin derivatives in aerobic microorganisms. The presence of 2-hydroxyhepta-2,4-diene-1,7-dioate isomerase in the expression profile of KL possibly indicated 4-hydroxyphenylacetate degradation through meta cleavage pathways [28]. Benzoyl-CoA oxygenase-mediated degradation of aromatic compound is completely different mechanisms and observed in 4–5% of sequenced bacterial genomes. This mechanism helps to overcome the high resonance stabilization of aromatic ring by forming epoxide. Benzoyl-CoA oxygenase leads to formation of 2,3-epoxide followed by enoyl-CoA hydratase (also expressed on KL) and NADP+-dependent aldehyde dehydrogenase (upregulated on KL)-mediated degradation resulting into formic acid, acetyl-CoA, and succinyl-CoA formation [29]. 1,2-phenylacetyl-CoA epoxidase-mediated degradation of phenylacetic acid occurs via 1,2-epoxide intermediate and this pathway is found functional in only 16% of all bacteria genome reported also observed in Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas putida [30]. The upregulation of Salicylate hydroxylase on lignin was also observed in the case of Pseudomonas A514 strain [17].

The expression of glycolate oxidase, oxidase, oxidase, aldehyde oxidase, and GMC family oxidoreductase (aryl alcohol oxidase) was observed on KL–VA and these acts as an accessory enzyme and the peroxides produced by them is utilized by peroxidases for lignin degradation [27, 31]. Expression of these oxidases has also been reported recently in Pseudomonas A514 and Pantoea ananatis Sd-1 [17, 27]. The detection of NADPH:quinone oxidoreductase in Pandoraea strain ISTKB indicates lignin degradation by Fenton reaction. NADPH:quinone oxidoreductase overexpression on lignin and rice straw was also reported recently [17, 27, 32, 33]. Quinone oxidoreductase system is of special interest in case of lignin degradation as fungi especially brown rot used fenton chemistry for lignin degradation with the help of quinone oxidoreductase [9, 31]. The role of NADPH: quinone oxidoreductase in degradation and depolymerization of lignin is well established and reported for Phanerochaete chrysosporium and Trametes versicolor [34, 35].

Dyp-type peroxidases are fungal counterparts of peroxidase (LiP or MnP) present in bacteria for lignin degradation. The peroxidases such as DyP-type peroxidase, peroxidase, chloroperoxidase, and peroxidase-like protein were detected in Pandoraea sp. ISTKB genome and in proteome. Some DyPs are secreted through TAT pathway and their encapsulation has been shown to increase the enzyme’s activity [36]. There are various functions reported recently for bacterial DyPs such as depolymerization, dimer formation, and degradation of aryl ether bonds in lignin and lignin containing compounds [15, 36, 37]. Laccases can degrade lignin in the presence of mediators and there are several natural mediators observed during lignin degradation [38, 39]. Two laccase genes were discovered in the genome and found to be functionally active in this strain. Laccases are reported for ether linkage (aryl β-O-4) and β-1 bond cleavage on lignin model dimers. The degradation of phenolic as well as non-phenolic substrate in the presence of mediators by laccases has also been reported [40, 41]. Formate dehydrogenase coverts formate into carbon dioxide and these formate radicals induce MnP activity, as they can use formate as peroxide in the absence of H2O2 [31]. Formyl transferase is reported for oxalate degradation and oxalate forms complex with Mn3+ (MnP oxidizes Mn2+–Mn3+) and the complex acts as diffusible redox mediator for the degradation of phenolics in lignin [31]. The expression of quinone oxidoreductase, acetyl-CoA acetyltransferase, enoyl-CoA hydratase, dehydrogenase (responsible for cleavage of ether linkage), and cytochrome peroxidase was expressed on lignin, but other known bacterial lignin degrader was not observed in Bacillus ligniniphilus L1 expression profile [33]. The catalase/hydroperoxidase, multicopper oxidase, GMC oxidoreductase, glutathione S-transferase, and quinone oxidoreductases were observed in the secretome of P. ananatis Sd-1 on rice straw [27]. In addition to these proteins, various other proteins were also expressed in Pandoraea sp. strain ISTKB that are responsible for lignin degradation.

The presence of demethylases, methyltransferases, and SAM-dependent methyltransferase indicated demethylation or rearrangement of methyl group during lignin degradation [42]. Demethylation is an important process in conversion of lignin-derived aromatic intermediates into common central intermediates such as catechol, protocatechuate, or gallate that further undergo ring cleavage. Demethylation system removes methyl group from methoxy-substituted lignin-derived aromatic compounds such as syringate, vanillate, or guaiacol in the presence of cofactors. The demethylases include Rieske type ([2Fe–2S] cluster) and reductase (a flavin and a [2Fe–2S]) redox center. The demethylases or methyltransferases were also reported and functionally validated in Pseudomonas and Acinetobacter [9, 42, 43]. Several acyl-CoA synthetases, acyl-CoA hydratases/lyases, acyl-CoA transferase, acetyl-CoA-acetyl transferases, and decarboxylases have been discovered in Pandoraea sp. ISTKB genome and in expression profile. These enzymes help in activation and decarboxylation of aromatic compounds (hydroxycinnamates, carboxyvanillin) and play an important role in diversion of substrate towards central degradation [4244]. The expression of both protocatechuate 3,4-dioxygenase and protocatechuate 4,5-dioxygenase on both KL–VA indicated that this strain has both functional ortho and meta cleavage pathway for degradation of lignin and its derivatives. The expression of metacleavage outperformed ortho pathway on vanillic acid. The presence of both ortho and meta cleavage pathways in single strain is rare phenomenon and the ortho cleavage pathway was found to be dominant among lignin degrading bacteria [9, 23]. The expression of both ortho and meta cleavage pathways in this strain illustrates its robust metabolic machinery for the degradation of aromatic compounds.

There are various glutathione-dependent enzymes identified in Pandoraea sp. ISTKB and glutathione has been known for detoxification mechanism and stress-related response. However, glutathione-dependent cleavage of β-aryl ether linkages (most dominant linkage in lignin) by β-etherase has also been described in Novosphingobium, Sphingobium SYK-6, Novosphingobium sp. PP1Y, and Thiobacillus denitrificans ATC 25259 [15, 45, 46]. Therefore, the presence of glutathione enzymes can help in lignin degradation in this strain. Superoxide dismutase and catalase–peroxidases were recently reported for lignin or lignin model compound in Sphingobacterium sp. T2 and Amycolatopsis sp. 75iv2, respectively, and these were also observed on KL–VA in this strain [47, 48].

Dehydrogenase acts on toxic aldehydes and converts them into their less toxic intermediates inside cells and also reported for cleavage of ether bond [43, 44]. There are various dehydrogenases observed in this strain and these might play important role in ether linkage degradation. The dehydrogenase-mediated degradation of ether linkage in lignin model compounds by SG61-1L and Lig DEG enzyme system in Sphingobium sp. SYK6 has been well documented [42, 49]. The combined action of alcohol dehydrogenase from short-chain dehydrogenase/reductase family and glutathione S-transferases has been show to degrade ether linkage (most prominent linkage in lignin 50–70%) in lignin model compounds [50]. The pathway for cleavage of β-aryl ether linkage in lignin by NAD-dependent dehydrogenases (LigD, LigO, and LigL) and the glutathione-dependent lyase (LigG) was structurally and biochemically characterized [51]. There are glutathione enzymes, superoxide dismutase, catalases, alkyl hydroperoxidase, thioredoxin, glyoxylase, aldo/keto reductase, and peroxiredoxin identified in Pandoraea sp. ISTKB. The presence of theses stress response and detoxification proteins has also been reported in genome sequence of Pseudomonas fluorescens Pf-5 [52]. The specificity of aldo/keto reductase against various lignin-derived phenolics, aldehyde, and fermentable inhibitors was demonstrated and was also shown to produce ROS and initiate fenton reaction [53]. Alky hydroperoxide reductase has greater catalytic efficiency under low H2O2 concentration and is responsible for the detoxification of organic hydroperoxides, as catalases cannot degrade organic hydroperoxides [54]. The analysis of such a diverse set of proteins and their level of expression helped us to identify the important enzymes responsible for lignin or aromatic compound degradation that will further provide opportunity for lignocellulosic biomass valorization.

Conclusion

The genomic and proteomic analysis of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB revealed the presence of various candidate genes responsible for lignin degradation and PHA production. GO analysis of genomic and proteomic data also supported the findings. The peroxidase-accessory enzyme system, fenton reaction, and ‘CoA’-mediated degradation of phenylacetate and benzoate are the major pathways observed for lignin degradation. The gene cluster responsible for lignin degradation and PHA production was found to be functionally active. The functional analysis supported genomic findings and a strong antioxidant and stress responsive machinery for the survival and metabolism of lignin or aromatic compounds was observed. Some secondary metabolites such as lassopeptide unique to this strain were also predicted that needs to be validated. The study indicated the pathways and enzymes important for metabolism of lignin or aromatic compounds that can be applied in the future for value addition to lignocellulosics.

Methods

The draft genome of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB was sequenced using the Illumina MiSeq platform, and the raw data processing, quality reads, assembly, scaffold generation, and genes prediction were carried out as described earlier [19]. Arrangement of genes of Pandoraea sp. strain ISTKB with respect to its genome was performed using clicO FS, i.e., circular layout interactive converter free services [55]. The proteins having signal sequence were identified using the SignalP 3.0 software [56]. The annotation and analysis of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB genome were also performed by Rapid Annotations using Subsystems technology (RAST). The RAST subsystem classification followed by pathway analysis was performed [57, 58]. GO analysis was performed and the genes predicted in genome have been classified into major biological processes, cellular component, and molecular functions using Blast2GO [59]. To identify the potential involvement of the genes of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB in biological pathways, genes were mapped to reference canonical pathways in Kyoto encyclopedia of genes’ and genomes’ (KEGG) database. The output of KEGG analysis includes KEGG orthology (KO) assignments and corresponding enzyme commission (EC) numbers and metabolic pathways of genes using KEGG automated annotation server KAAS (http://www.genome.jp/kaas-bin/kaasmain) [60]. A total of 5568 genes for Pandoraea sp. ISTKB were provided as input to KEGG–KAAS and genes involved in different pathways were further classified into 22 functional pathways. The antimicrobial and secondary metabolite clusters were predicted by antiSMASH 3.0 and genomic islands were predicted using islandviewer4 [61, 62].

Culture conditions and sample preparation for proteomic analysis

Pandoraea sp. ISTKB was grown in mineral medium (MM) containing vanillic acid and kraft lignin as sole carbon source. The composition of MM was the same as described earlier [6]. A single colony was transferred from LB plate to broth and incubated overnight at 30 °C and 165 rpm. One milliliter of overnight culture was transferred to fresh 100 ml LB media and allowed to grow until OD600 reached around 0.5. The cells were pelleted, washed twice with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), and inoculated in flask containing VA and KL having initial OD of around 0.06. Bacteria were grown at 30 °C, 165 rpm and the OD was monitored at regular interval. The culture was harvested during exponential growth phase for proteomics study. Cells were pelleted by cold centrifugation at 10,000 rpm for 15 min washed with PBS and then resuspended in lysis buffer followed by sonication as described earlier [6]. Total protein concentration was estimated by Bradford method, and then, digestion was performed taking equal volume of proteins from both KL and VA.

Digestion of proteins, LC–MS/MS analyses, and data analysis

The protein concentration of 25 µg from both KL and VA was reduced with 5 mM concentration TCEP for 10 min at room temperature and further alkylated with 15 mM iodoacetamide in dark at room temperature for 30 min. The sample was diluted to 0.6 M final Gn-HCl concentration with 25 mM ammonium bicarbonate buffer. For digestion of protein, trypsin was added in a trypsin-to-lysate ratio of 1:50 after and incubation was performed overnight at 37 °C. The supernatant was vacuum dried and the peptides were reconstituted in 5% formic acid followed by purification using C18 silica cartridge and dried using speed vac. The dried pellets were resuspended in buffer-A (5% acetonitrile/0.15 formic acid).

The peptides were analyzed using EASY-nLC 1000 system (Thermo Fisher Scientific) coupled to QExtractive mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific) equipped with nanoelectrospray ion source. 1 µg of peptide mixture was loaded on precolumn and resolved using 15 cm Pico Frit filled with 1.8 um C18-resin (Dr. Maeisch). The sample was run for 90 min and the peptides were eluted with a 0–40% gradient of buffer B (95% acetonitrile/0.1% formic acid) at a flow rate of 300 nl/min. the QExtractive was operated using the Top10 HCD data-dependent acquisition mode with a full-scan resolution of 70,000 at m/z 400. The MS/MS scans were acquired at a resolution of 17500 at m/z 400. Lock mass option was enabled for polydimethylcyclosiloxane (PCM) ions (m/z = 445.120025) for internal recalibration during the run. MS identification of Q extractive files was analyzed by the MaxQuant software and searched against databases at a false-discovery rate (FDR) of 1%. A total of protein groups were identified and were further filtered according to the label-free quantitation (LFQ) intensity values and their respective fold change values were calculated. Heat map and profile plots were against the protein groups filtered based on the normalized LFQ intensity values using the Perseus software. The proteins with at least two unique peptides detected were selected for quantification and differential expression study.

Declarations

Authors’ contributions

MK, IST, PKV, and AP designed the study and experiments. MK, SV, RKG, and MK performed the experiments, bioinformatics, and data analysis. MK and SV wrote the manuscript. AP, IST, and PKV supervised the research work. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

Madan Kumar thanks Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), New Delhi, India for providing Senior Research Fellowship. P.K.V. thanks the National Institute of Plant Genome Research, New Delhi, for financial support. We thank Shashi Shekhar Singh and Gagandeep Jhingan for their support in proteomics work. We are grateful to Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India, for providing financial support.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
School of Environmental Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, 110067, India
(2)
National Institute of Plant Genome Research, Aruna Asaf Ali Marg, New Delhi, 110067, India
(3)
CSIR-Indian Institute of Toxicology Research, 31 MG Marg, Lucknow, 226 001, India

References

  1. Coenye T, Falsen E, Hoste B, Ohlén M, Goris J, Govan J, Gillis M, Vandamme P. NEW TAXA-proteobacteria-description of Pandoraea gen. nov. with Pandoraea apista sp. nov., Pandoraea pulmonicola sp. nov., Pandoraea pnomenusa sp. nov., Pandoraea sputorum sp. nov. and Pandoraea. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2000;50(2):887–900.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Daneshvar MI, Hollis DG, Steigerwalt AG, Whitney AM, Spangler L, Douglas MP, Jordan JG, MacGregor JP, Hill BC, Tenover FC. Assignment of CDC weak oxidizer group 2 (WO-2) to the genus Pandoraea and characterization of three new Pandoraea genomospecies. J Clin Microbiol. 2001;39(5):1819–26.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Anandham R, Indiragandhi P, Kwon SW, Sa TM, Jeon CO, Kim YK, Jee HJ. Pandoraea thiooxydans sp. nov., a facultatively chemolithotrophic, thiosulfate-oxidizing bacterium isolated from rhizosphere soils of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.). Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2010;60(1):21–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Sahin N, Tani A, Kotan R, Sedláček I, Kimbara K, Tamer AU. Pandoraea oxalativorans sp. nov., Pandoraea faecigallinarum sp. nov. and Pandoraea vervacti sp. nov., isolated from oxalate-enriched culture. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2011;61(9):2247–53.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen CY, Kuo JT, Cheng CY, Huang YT, Ho IH, Chung YC. Biological decolorization of dye solution containing malachite green by Pandoraea pulmonicola YC32 using a batch and continuous system. J Hazard Mater. 2009;172(2):1439–45.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Kumar M, Singh J, Singh MK, Singhal A, Thakur IS. Investigating the degradation process of kraft lignin by β-proteobacterium, Pandoraea sp. ISTKB. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2015;22(20):15690–702.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Tian JH, Pourcher AM, Bouchez T, Gelhaye E, Peu P. Occurrence of lignin degradation genotypes and phenotypes among prokaryotes. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2014;98(23):9527–44.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Priyadarshinee R, Kumar A, Mandal T, Dasguptamandal D. Unleashing the potential of ligninolytic bacterial contributions towards pulp and paper industry: key challenges and new insights. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2016;23(23):23349–68.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Bugg TD, Ahmad M, Hardiman EM, Rahmanpour R. Pathways for degradation of lignin in bacteria and fungi. Nat Prod Rep. 2011;28(12):1883–96.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown ME, Chang MC. Exploring bacterial lignin degradation. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2014;19:1–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Beckham GT, Johnson CW, Karp EM, Salvachúa D, Vardon DR. Opportunities and challenges in biological lignin valorization. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2016;42:40–53.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Baldrian P, López-Mondéjar R. Microbial genomics, transcriptomics and proteomics: new discoveries in decomposition research using complementary methods. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2014;98(4):1531–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Cragg SM, Beckham GT, Bruce NC, Bugg TD, Distel DL, Dupree P, Etxabe AG, Goodell BS, Jellison J, McGeehan JE. Lignocellulose degradation mechanisms across the Tree of Life. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2015;29:108–19.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Qin W. Recent developments in using advanced sequencing technologies for the genomic studies of lignin and cellulose degrading microorganisms. Int J Biol Sci. 2016;12(2):156.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  15. de Gonzalo G, Colpa DI, Habib MH, Fraaije MW. Bacterial enzymes involved in lignin degradation. J Biotechnol. 2016;236:110–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Manavalan A, Adav SS, Sze SK. iTRAQ-based quantitative secretome analysis of Phanerochaete chrysosporium. J Proteomics. 2011;75(2):642–54.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Lin L, Cheng Y, Pu Y, Sun S, Li X, Jin M, Pierson EA, Gross DC, Dale BE, Dai SY. Systems biology-guided biodesign of consolidated lignin conversion. Green Chem. 2016;18(20):5536–47.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Singh MK, Kumar M, Thakur IS. Proteomic characterization and schizophyllan production by Schizophyllum commune ISTL04 cultured on Leucaena leucocephala wood under submerged fermentation. Bioresour Technol. 2017;236:29–36.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Kumar M, Gazara RK, Verma S, Kumar M, Verma PK, Thakur IS. Genome sequence of Pandoraea sp. ISTKB, a lignin-degrading betaproteobacterium, isolated from rhizospheric soil. Genome Announc. 2016;4(6):0124001216.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Kumar M, Singhal A, Verma PK, Thakur IS. Production and characterization of polyhydroxyalkanoate from lignin derivatives by Pandoraea sp. ISTKB. ACS Omega. 2017;2(12):9156–63.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Varman AM, He L, Follenfant R, Wu W, Wemmer S, Wrobel SA, Tang YJ, Singh S. Decoding how a soil bacterium extracts building blocks and metabolic energy from ligninolysis provides road map for lignin valorization. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2016;113(40):E5802–11.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Kumar M, Singhal A, Thakur IS. Comparison of submerged and solid state pretreatment of sugarcane bagasse by Pandoraea sp. ISTKB: enzymatic and structural analysis. Bioresour Technol. 2016;203:18–25.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Fuchs G, Boll M, Heider J. Microbial degradation of aromatic compounds—from one strategy to four. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2011;9(11):803–16.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Cabiscol Català E, Tamarit Sumalla J, Ros Salvador J. Oxidative stress in bacteria and protein damage by reactive oxygen species. Int Microbiol. 2000;3(1):3–8.Google Scholar
  25. Hasanuzzaman M, Nahar K, Hossain MS, Mahmud JA, Rahman A, Inafuku M, Oku H, Fujita M. Coordinated actions of glyoxalase and antioxidant defense systems in conferring abiotic stress tolerance in plants. Int J Mol Sci. 2017;18(1):200.View ArticlePubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Rehm BH. Bacterial polymers: biosynthesis, modifications and applications. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2010;8(8):578–92.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Ma J, Zhang K, Liao H, Hector SB, Shi X, Li J, Liu B, Xu T, Tong C, Liu X. Genomic and secretomic insight into lignocellulolytic system of an endophytic bacterium Pantoea ananatis Sd-1. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2016;9(1):25.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Garrido-Pertierra A, Cooper RA. Identification and purification of distinct isomerase and decarboxylase enzymes involved in the 4-hydroxyphenylacetate catabolic pathway of Escherichia coli. FEBS J. 1981;117(3):581–4.Google Scholar
  29. Rather LJ, Knapp B, Haehnel W, Fuchs G. Coenzyme A-dependent aerobic metabolism of benzoate via epoxide formation. J Biol Chem. 2010;285(27):20615–24.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Teufel R, Mascaraque V, Ismail W, Voss M, Perera J, Eisenreich W, Haehnel W, Fuchs G. Bacterial phenylalanine and phenylacetate catabolic pathway revealed. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2010;107(32):14390–5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Dashtban M, Schraft H, Syed TA, Qin W. Fungal biodegradation and enzymatic modification of lignin. Int J Biochem Mol Biol. 2010;1(1):36.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Baldrian P, Valášková V. Degradation of cellulose by basidiomycetous fungi. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2008;32(3):501–21.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  33. Zhu D, Zhang P, Xie C, Zhang W, Sun J, Qian W-J, Yang B. Biodegradation of alkaline lignin by Bacillus ligniniphilus L1. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2017;10(1):44.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Constam D, Muheim A, Zimmermann W, Fiechter A. Purification and partial characterization of an intracellular NADH: quinone oxidoreductase from Phanerochaete chrysosporium. Microbiology. 1991;137(9):2209–14.Google Scholar
  35. Lee S, Moon D, Choi HT, Song H. Purification and characterization of an intracellular NADH: quinone reductase from Trametes versicolor. J Microbiol. 2007;45(4):333.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Rahmanpour R, Rea D, Jamshidi S, Fülöp V, Bugg TD. Structure of Thermobifida fusca DyP-type peroxidase and activity towards kraft lignin and lignin model compounds. Arch Biochem Biophys. 2016;594:54–60.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Singh R, Grigg JC, Qin W, Kadla JF, Murphy ME, Eltis LD. Improved manganese-oxidizing activity of DypB, a peroxidase from a lignolytic bacterium. ACS Chem Biol. 2013;8(4):700–6.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Christopher LP, Yao B, Ji Y. Lignin biodegradation with laccase-mediator systems. Front Energy Res. 2014;2:12.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  39. Munk L, Sitarz AK, Kalyani DC, Mikkelsen JD, Meyer AS. Can laccases catalyze bond cleavage in lignin? Biotechnol Adv. 2015;33(1):13–24.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  40. Sondhi S, Sharma P, George N, Chauhan PS, Puri N, Gupta N. An extracellular thermo-alkali-stable laccase from Bacillus tequilensis SN4, with a potential to biobleach softwood pulp. 3 Biotech. 2015;5(2):175–85.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Shi X, Liu Q, Ma J, Liao H, Xiong X, Zhang K, Wang T, Liu X, Xu T, Yuan S. An acid-stable bacterial laccase identified from the endophyte Pantoea ananatis Sd-1 genome exhibiting lignin degradation and dye decolorization abilities. Biotechnol Lett. 2015;37(11):2279–88.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Masai E, Katayama Y, Fukuda M. Genetic and biochemical investigations on bacterial catabolic pathways for lignin-derived aromatic compounds. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2007;71(1):1–15.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Abdelaziz OY, Brink DP, Prothmann J, Ravi K, Sun M, García-Hidalgo J, Sandahl M, Hulteberg CP, Turner C, Lidén G. Biological valorization of low molecular weight lignin. Biotechnol Adv. 2016;34(8):1318–46.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Pérez-Pantoja D, González B, Pieper D. Aerobic degradation of aromatic hydrocarbons. In: Timmis KN, editor. Handbook of hydrocarbon and lipid microbiology. Berlin: Springer; 2010. p. 799–837.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  45. Tanamura K, Abe T, Kamimura N, Kasai D, Hishiyama S, Otsuka Y, Nakamura M, Kajita S, Katayama Y, Fukuda M. Characterization of the third glutathione S-transferase gene involved in enantioselective cleavage of the β-aryl ether by Sphingobium sp. strain SYK-6. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2011;75(12):2404–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Picart P, Müller C, Mottweiler J, Wiermans L, Bolm C, Domínguez de María P, Schallmey A. From gene towards selective biomass valorization: bacterial β-etherases with catalytic activity on lignin-like polymers. Chemsuschem. 2014;7(11):3164–71.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Brown ME, Walker MC, Nakashige TG, Iavarone AT, Chang MC. Discovery and characterization of heme enzymes from unsequenced bacteria: application to microbial lignin degradation. J Am Chem Soc. 2011;133(45):18006–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Rashid GM, Taylor CR, Liu Y, Zhang X, Rea D, Fülöp V, Bugg TD. Identification of manganese superoxide dismutase from Sphingobacterium sp. T2 as a novel bacterial enzyme for lignin oxidation. ACS Chem Biol. 2015;10(10):2286–94.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Palamuru S, Dellas N, Pearce SL, Warden AC, Oakeshott JG, Pandey G. Phylogenetic and kinetic characterization of a suite of dehydrogenases from a newly isolated bacterium, strain SG61-1L, that catalyze the turnover of guaiacylglycerol-β-guaiacyl ether stereoisomers. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2015;81(23):8164–76.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  50. Sato Y, Moriuchi H, Hishiyama S, Otsuka Y, Oshima K, Kasai D, Nakamura M, Ohara S, Katayama Y, Fukuda M. Identification of three alcohol dehydrogenase genes involved in the stereospecific catabolism of arylglycerol-β-aryl ether by Sphingobium sp. strain SYK-6. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2009;75(16):5195–201.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  51. Pereira JH, Heins RA, Gall DL, McAndrew RP, Deng K, Holland KC, Donohue TJ, Noguera DR, Simmons BA, Sale KL. Structural and biochemical characterization of the early and late enzymes in the lignin β-aryl ether cleavage pathway from Sphingobium sp. SYK-6. J Biol Chem. 2016;291(19):10228–38.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  52. Paulsen IT, Press CM, Ravel J, Kobayashi DY, Myers GS, Mavrodi DV, DeBoy RT, Seshadri R, Ren Q, Madupu R. Complete genome sequence of the plant commensal Pseudomonas fluorescens Pf-5. Nat Biotechnol. 2005;23(7):873–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Tramontina R, Cairo JPLF, Liberato MV, Mandelli F, Sousa A, Santos S, Rabelo SC, Campos B, Ienczak J, Ruller R. The Coptotermes gestroi aldo–keto reductase: a multipurpose enzyme for biorefinery applications. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2017;10(1):4.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  54. Seaver LC, Imlay JA. Alkyl hydroperoxide reductase is the primary scavenger of endogenous hydrogen peroxide in Escherichia coli. J Bacteriol. 2001;183(24):7173–81.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  55. Cheong WH, Tan YC, Yap SJ, Ng KP. ClicO FS: an interactive web-based service of Circos. Bioinformatics. 2015;31(22):3685–7.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  56. Bendtsen JD, Nielsen H, von Heijne G, Brunak S. Improved prediction of signal peptides: SignalP 3.0. J Mol Biol. 2004;340(4):783–95.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Aziz RK, Bartels D, Best AA, DeJongh M, Disz T, Edwards RA, Formsma K, Gerdes S, Glass EM, Kubal M. The RAST server: rapid annotations using subsystems technology. BMC Genomics. 2008;9(1):75.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  58. Overbeek R, Olson R, Pusch GD, Olsen GJ, Davis JJ, Disz T, Edwards RA, Gerdes S, Parrello B, Shukla M. The SEED and the rapid annotation of microbial genomes using subsystems technology (RAST). Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;42(D1):D206–14.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  59. Conesa A, Götz S, García-Gómez JM, Terol J, Talón M, Robles M. Blast2GO: a universal tool for annotation, visualization and analysis in functional genomics research. Bioinformatics. 2005;21(18):3674–6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  60. Moriya Y, Itoh M, Okuda S, Yoshizawa AC, Kanehisa M. KAAS: an automatic genome annotation and pathway reconstruction server. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35(suppl_2):W182–5.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  61. Weber T, Blin K, Duddela S, Krug D, Kim HU, Bruccoleri R, Lee SY, Fischbach MA, Müller R, Wohlleben W. antiSMASH 3.0—a comprehensive resource for the genome mining of biosynthetic gene clusters. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015;43(W1):W237–43.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  62. Bertelli C, Laird MR, Williams KP, Group SFURC, Lau BY, Hoad G, Winsor GL, Brinkman FS. IslandViewer 4: expanded prediction of genomic islands for larger-scale datasets. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017;45(W1):W30–5.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s) 2018

Advertisement