Cargando…
Evaluation and Optimization of Protein Extraction From E. coli by Electroporation
Growing diversity of protein-based technologies dictates further development of bio manufacturing to lower the cost of production and maximize yields. Intracellularly expressed recombinant proteins must be extracted from production host prior to purification. Use of electroporation to obtain protein...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7506034/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33015013 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.543187 |
_version_ | 1783584942847950848 |
---|---|
author | Haberl Meglič, Saša Janež, Nika Peterka, Matjaž Flisar, Karel Kotnik, Tadej Miklavčič, Damijan |
author_facet | Haberl Meglič, Saša Janež, Nika Peterka, Matjaž Flisar, Karel Kotnik, Tadej Miklavčič, Damijan |
author_sort | Haberl Meglič, Saša |
collection | PubMed |
description | Growing diversity of protein-based technologies dictates further development of bio manufacturing to lower the cost of production and maximize yields. Intracellularly expressed recombinant proteins must be extracted from production host prior to purification. Use of electroporation to obtain proteins from bacteria and yeasts has been demonstrated in several studies for different modes of operation and formats. Here we tested various protocols for protein extraction from Escherichia coli by means of electroporation. The tested protocols were compared to established extraction methods of ultrasonication and glass-bead milling in terms of protein yields and content of impurities such as host cell DNA and endotoxins in the lysate. Protein extraction yield was maximal when exponentially growing bacteria were treated at 37°C, regardless of the electroporation mode of operation (batch or flow). We were unable to eliminate co-extraction of host DNA and endotoxins, but with 8 × 1 ms, 5 kV/cm, 1 Hz pulses they were minimized. Yields with optimized electroporation (up to 86 g protein/kg dry weight) were inferior to those in ultrasonication (up to 144 g protein/kg dry weight) and glass-bead milling (up to 280 g protein/kg dry weight). Nevertheless, electroporation largely avoids cell lysis and disintegration with which the extract is a mix of extracted proteins with debris of the bacterial envelope and bacterial DNA, which necessitates further purification. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7506034 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75060342020-10-02 Evaluation and Optimization of Protein Extraction From E. coli by Electroporation Haberl Meglič, Saša Janež, Nika Peterka, Matjaž Flisar, Karel Kotnik, Tadej Miklavčič, Damijan Front Bioeng Biotechnol Bioengineering and Biotechnology Growing diversity of protein-based technologies dictates further development of bio manufacturing to lower the cost of production and maximize yields. Intracellularly expressed recombinant proteins must be extracted from production host prior to purification. Use of electroporation to obtain proteins from bacteria and yeasts has been demonstrated in several studies for different modes of operation and formats. Here we tested various protocols for protein extraction from Escherichia coli by means of electroporation. The tested protocols were compared to established extraction methods of ultrasonication and glass-bead milling in terms of protein yields and content of impurities such as host cell DNA and endotoxins in the lysate. Protein extraction yield was maximal when exponentially growing bacteria were treated at 37°C, regardless of the electroporation mode of operation (batch or flow). We were unable to eliminate co-extraction of host DNA and endotoxins, but with 8 × 1 ms, 5 kV/cm, 1 Hz pulses they were minimized. Yields with optimized electroporation (up to 86 g protein/kg dry weight) were inferior to those in ultrasonication (up to 144 g protein/kg dry weight) and glass-bead milling (up to 280 g protein/kg dry weight). Nevertheless, electroporation largely avoids cell lysis and disintegration with which the extract is a mix of extracted proteins with debris of the bacterial envelope and bacterial DNA, which necessitates further purification. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-09-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7506034/ /pubmed/33015013 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.543187 Text en Copyright © 2020 Haberl Meglič, Janež, Peterka, Flisar, Kotnik and Miklavčič. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Bioengineering and Biotechnology Haberl Meglič, Saša Janež, Nika Peterka, Matjaž Flisar, Karel Kotnik, Tadej Miklavčič, Damijan Evaluation and Optimization of Protein Extraction From E. coli by Electroporation |
title | Evaluation and Optimization of Protein Extraction From E. coli by Electroporation |
title_full | Evaluation and Optimization of Protein Extraction From E. coli by Electroporation |
title_fullStr | Evaluation and Optimization of Protein Extraction From E. coli by Electroporation |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation and Optimization of Protein Extraction From E. coli by Electroporation |
title_short | Evaluation and Optimization of Protein Extraction From E. coli by Electroporation |
title_sort | evaluation and optimization of protein extraction from e. coli by electroporation |
topic | Bioengineering and Biotechnology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7506034/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33015013 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.543187 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT haberlmeglicsasa evaluationandoptimizationofproteinextractionfromecolibyelectroporation AT janeznika evaluationandoptimizationofproteinextractionfromecolibyelectroporation AT peterkamatjaz evaluationandoptimizationofproteinextractionfromecolibyelectroporation AT flisarkarel evaluationandoptimizationofproteinextractionfromecolibyelectroporation AT kotniktadej evaluationandoptimizationofproteinextractionfromecolibyelectroporation AT miklavcicdamijan evaluationandoptimizationofproteinextractionfromecolibyelectroporation |