Endo-exo synergism in cellulose hydrolysis revisited.

Synergistic cooperation of different enzymes is a prerequisite for efficient degradation of cellulose. The conventional mechanistic interpretation of the synergism between randomly acting endoglucanases (EGs) and chain end-specific processive cellobiohydrolases (CBHs) is that EG-generated new chain ends on cellulose surface serve as starting points for CBHs. Here we studied the hydrolysis of bacterial cellulose (BC) by CBH TrCel7A and EG TrCel5A from Trichoderma reesei under both single-turnover and "steady state" conditions. Unaccountable by conventional interpretation, the presence of EG increased the rate constant of TrCel7A-catalyzed hydrolysis of BC in steady state. At optimal enzyme/substrate ratios, the "steady state" rate of synergistic hydrolysis became limited by the velocity of processive movement of TrCel7A on BC. A processivity value of 66 ± 7 cellobiose units measured for TrCel7A on (14)C-labeled BC was close to the leveling off degree of polymerization of BC, suggesting that TrCel7A cannot pass through the amorphous regions on BC and stalls. We propose a mechanism of endo-exo synergism whereby the degradation of amorphous regions by EG avoids the stalling of TrCel7A and leads to its accelerated recruitment. Hydrolysis of pretreated wheat straw suggested that this mechanism of synergism is operative also in the degradation of lignocellulose. Although both mechanisms of synergism are used in parallel, the contribution of conventional mechanism is significant only at high enzyme/substrate ratios.

Product inhibition of cellulases studied with 14C-labeled cellulose substrates.

BACKGROUND: As a green alternative for the production of transportation fuels, the enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulose and subsequent fermentation to ethanol are being intensively researched. To be economically feasible, the hydrolysis of lignocellulose must be conducted at a high concentration of solids, which results in high concentrations of hydrolysis end-products, cellobiose and glucose, making the relief of product inhibition of cellulases a major challenge in the process. However, little quantitative information on the product inhibition of individual cellulases acting on cellulose substrates is available because it is experimentally difficult to assess the hydrolysis of the heterogeneous polymeric substrate in the high background of added products. RESULTS: The cellobiose and glucose inhibition of thermostable cellulases from Acremonium thermophilum, Thermoascus aurantiacus, and Chaetomium thermophilum acting on uniformly 14C-labeled bacterial cellulose and its derivatives, 14C-bacterial microcrystalline cellulose and 14C-amorphous cellulose, was studied. Cellulases from Trichoderma reesei were used for comparison. The enzymes most sensitive to cellobiose inhibition were glycoside hydrolase (GH) family 7 cellobiohydrolases (CBHs), followed by family 6 CBHs and endoglucanases (EGs). The strength of glucose inhibition followed the same order. The product inhibition of all enzymes was relieved at higher temperatures. The inhibition strength measured for GH7 CBHs with low molecular-weight model substrates did not correlate with that measured with 14C-cellulose substrates. CONCLUSIONS: GH7 CBHs are the primary targets for product inhibition of the synergistic hydrolysis of cellulose. The inhibition must be studied on cellulose substrates instead of on low molecular-weight model substrates when selecting enzymes for lignocellulose hydrolysis. The advantages of using higher temperatures are an increase in the catalytic efficiency of enzymes and the relief of product inhibition.

Selecting ß-glucosidases to support cellulases in cellulose saccharification.

BACKGROUND: Enzyme end-product inhibition is a major challenge in the hydrolysis of lignocellulose at a high dry matter consistency. ß-glucosidases (BGs) hydrolyze cellobiose into two molecules of glucose, thereby relieving the product inhibition of cellobiohydrolases (CBHs). However, BG inhibition by glucose will eventually lead to the accumulation of cellobiose and the inhibition of CBHs. Therefore, the kinetic properties of candidate BGs must meet the requirements determined by both the kinetic properties of CBHs and the set-up of the hydrolysis process. RESULTS: The kinetics of cellobiose hydrolysis and glucose inhibition of thermostable BGs from Acremonium thermophilum (AtBG3) and Thermoascus aurantiacus (TaBG3) was studied and compared to Aspergillus sp. BG purified from Novozyme®188 (N188BG). The most efficient cellobiose hydrolysis was achieved with TaBG3, followed by AtBG3 and N188BG, whereas the enzyme most sensitive to glucose inhibition was AtBG3, followed by TaBG3 and N188BG. The use of higher temperatures had an advantage in both increasing the catalytic efficiency and relieving the product inhibition of the enzymes. Our data, together with data from a literature survey, revealed a trade-off between the strength of glucose inhibition and the affinity for cellobiose; therefore, glucose-tolerant BGs tend to have low specificity constants for cellobiose hydrolysis. However, although a high specificity constant is always an advantage, in separate hydrolysis and fermentation, the priority may be given to a higher tolerance to glucose inhibition. CONCLUSIONS: The specificity constant for cellobiose hydrolysis and the inhibition constant for glucose are the most important kinetic parameters in selecting BGs to support cellulases in cellulose hydrolysis.

Strong cellulase inhibitors from the hydrothermal pretreatment of wheat straw.

BACKGROUND: The use of the enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulose with subsequent fermentation to ethanol provides a green alternative for the production of transportation fuels. Because of its recalcitrant nature, the lignocellulosic biomass must be pretreated before enzymatic hydrolysis. However, the pretreatment often results in the formation of compounds that are inhibitory for the enzymes or fermenting organism. Although well recognized, little quantitative information on the inhibition of individual cellulase components by identified inhibitors is available. RESULTS: Strong cellulase inhibitors were separated from the liquid fraction of the hydrothermal pretreatment of wheat straw. HPLC and mass-spectroscopy analyses confirmed that the inhibitors were oligosaccharides (inhibitory oligosaccharides, IOS) with a degree of polymerization from 7 to 16. The IOS are composed of a mixture of xylo- (XOS) and gluco-oligosaccharides (GOS). We propose that XOS and GOS are the fragments of the xylan backbone and mixed-linkage ß-glucans, respectively. The IOS were approximately 100 times stronger inhibitors for Trichoderma reesei cellobiohydrolases (CBHs) than cellobiose, which is one of the strongest inhibitors of these enzymes reported to date. Inhibition of endoglucanases (EGs) by IOS was weaker than that of CBHs. Most of the tested cellulases and hemicellulases were able to slowly degrade IOS and reduce the inhibitory power of the liquid fraction to some extent. The most efficient single enzyme component here was T. reesei EG TrCel7B. Although reduced by the enzyme treatment, the residual inhibitory power of IOS and the liquid fraction was strong enough to silence the major component of the T. reesei cellulase system, CBH TrCel7A. CONCLUSIONS: The cellulase inhibitors described here may be responsible for the poor yields from the enzymatic conversion of the whole slurries from lignocellulose pretreatment under conditions that do not favor complete degradation of hemicellulose. Identification of the inhibitory compounds helps to design better enzyme mixtures for their degradation and to optimize the pretreatment regimes to minimize their formation.