Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology

, Volume 103, Issue 13, pp 5435–5446 | Cite as

Comparative global metabolite profiling of xylose-fermenting Saccharomyces cerevisiae SR8 and Scheffersomyces stipitis

  • Minhye Shin
  • Jeong-won Kim
  • Suji Ye
  • Sooah Kim
  • Deokyeol Jeong
  • Do Yup Lee
  • Jong Nam Kim
  • Yong-Su Jin
  • Kyoung Heon Kim
  • Soo Rin KimEmail author
Bioenergy and biofuels


Bioconversion of lignocellulosic biomass into ethanol requires efficient xylose fermentation. Previously, we developed an engineered Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain, named SR8, through rational and inverse metabolic engineering strategies, thereby improving its xylose fermentation and ethanol production. However, its fermentation characteristics have not yet been fully evaluated. In this study, we investigated the xylose fermentation and metabolic profiles for ethanol production in the SR8 strain compared with native Scheffersomyces stipitis. The SR8 strain showed a higher maximum ethanol titer and xylose consumption rate when cultured with a high concentration of xylose, mixed sugars, and under anaerobic conditions than Sch. stipitis. However, its ethanol productivity was less on 40 g/L xylose as the sole carbon source, mainly due to the formation of xylitol and glycerol. Global metabolite profiling indicated different intracellular production rates of xylulose and glycerol-3-phosphate in the two strains. In addition, compared with Sch. stipitis, SR8 had increased abundances of metabolites from sugar metabolism and decreased abundances of metabolites from energy metabolism and free fatty acids. These results provide insights into how to control and balance redox cofactors for the production of fuels and chemicals from xylose by the engineered S. cerevisiae.


Saccharomyces cerevisiae Scheffersomyces stipitis GC-TOF/MS Metabolomics Xylose fermentation 


Author contributions

SRK designed the experiments. MS, JK, SY, SK, and DYL carried out all of the experiments. MS, JK, and SRK drafted the manuscript. DJ and JNK contributed to the revision of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the final manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding information

This work was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (2015R1D1A1A01057217).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.


  1. Acevedo A, Conejeros R, Aroca G (2017) Ethanol production improvement driven by genome-scale metabolic modeling and sensitivity analysis in Scheffersomyces stipitis. PLoS One 12:0180074. Google Scholar
  2. du Preez JC, Prior BA (1985) A quantitative screening of some xylose-fermenting yeast isolates. Biotechnol Lett 7:241–246. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Hahn-Hägerdal B, Karhumaa K, Fonseca C, Spencer-Martins I, Gorwa-Grauslund MF (2007) Towards industrial pentose-fermenting yeast strains. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 74:937–953. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hilliard M, Damiani A, He QP, Jeffries T, Wang J (2018) Elucidating redox balance shift in Scheffersomyces stipitis’ fermentative metabolism using a modified genome-scale metabolic model. Microb Cell Factories 17:140. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ho NW, Chen Z, Brainard AP (1998) Genetically engineered Saccharomyces yeast capable of effective cofermentation of glucose and xylose. Appl Environ Microbiol 64:1852–1859Google Scholar
  6. Hong K-K, Nielsen J (2012) Metabolic engineering of Saccharomyces cerevisiae: a key cell factory platform for future biorefineries. Cell Mol Life Sci 69:2671–2690. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hou X (2012) Anaerobic xylose fermentation by Spathaspora passalidarum. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 94:205–214. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jeffries TW, Van Vleet JRH (2009) Pichia stipitis genomics, transcriptomics, and gene clusters. FEMS Yeast Res 9:793–807. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jin X-M, Chang Y-K, Lee JH, Hong S-K (2017) Effects of increased NADPH concentration by metabolic engineering of the pentose phosphate pathway on antibiotic production and sporulation in Streptomyces lividans TK24. J Microbiol Biotechnol 27:1867–1876. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jung YH, Kim S, Yang J, Seo J-H, Kim KH (2017) Intracellular metabolite profiling of Saccharomyces cerevisiae evolved under furfural. Microb Biotechnol 10:395–404. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kim SR, Skerker JM, Kang W, Lesmana A, Wei N, Arkin AP, Jin Y-S (2013) Rational and evolutionary engineering approaches uncover a small set of genetic changes efficient for rapid xylose fermentation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. PLoS One 8:57048. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kim SR, Xu H, Lesmana A, Kuzmanovic U, Au M, Florencia C, Oh EJ, Zhang G, Kim KH, Jin Y-S (2015) Deletion of PHO13, encoding haloacid dehalogenase type IIA phosphatase, results in upregulation of the pentose phosphate pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl Environ Microbiol 81:1601–1609. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Koh H-J, Lee S-M, Son B-G, Lee S-H, Ryoo ZY, Chang K-T, Park J-W, Park D-C, Song BJ, Veech RL, Song H, Huh T-L (2004) Cytosolic NADP+-dependent isocitrate dehydrogenase plays a key role in lipid metabolism. J Biol Chem 279(38):39968–39974.
  14. Kötter P, Amore R, Hollenberg CP, Ciriacy M (1990) Isolation and characterization of the Pichia stipitis xylitol dehydrogenase gene, XYL2, and construction of a xylose-utilizing Saccharomyces cerevisiae transformant. Curr Genet 18:493–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kuznetsova E, Proudfoot M, Gonzalez CF, Brown G, Omelchenko MV, Borozan I, Carmel L, Wolf YI, Mori H, Savchenko AV, Arrowsmith CH, Koonin EV, Edwards AM, Yakunin AF (2006) Genome-wide analysis of substrate specificities of the Escherichia coli haloacid dehalogenase-like phosphatase family. J Biol Chem 281:36149–36161. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kwak S, Jin Y-S (2017) Production of fuels and chemicals from xylose by engineered Saccharomyces cerevisiae: a review and perspective. Microb Cell Factories 16:82. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lemus MR, Roussarie E, Hammad N, Mougeolle A, Ransac S, Issa R, Mazat J-P, Uribe-Carvajal S, Rigoulet M, Devin A (2018) The role of glycolysis-derived hexose phosphates in the induction of the Crabtree effect. J Biol Chem 293(33):12843–12854.
  18. Øverland M, Skrede A (2017) Yeast derived from lignocellulosic biomass as a sustainable feed resource for use in aquaculture. J Sci Food Agric 97:733–742. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Peeters K, Van Leemputte F, Fischer B, Bonini BM, Quezada H, Tsytlonok M, Haesen D, Vanthienen W, Bernardes N, Gonzalez-Blas CB, Janssens V, Tompa P, Versées W, Thevelein JM (2017) Fructose-1,6-bisphosphate couples glycolytic flux to activation of Ras. Nat Commun 8:922. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rho HS, Choi K (2018) Cofactor regeneration using permeabilized Escherichia coli expressing NAD(P)+-dependent glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenase. J Microbiol Biotechnol 28:1346–1351. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Silva JPA, Mussatto SI, Roberto IC (2010) The influence of initial xylose concentration, agitation, and aeration on ethanol production by Pichia stipitis from rice straw hemicellulosic hydrolysate. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 162:1306–1315. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Stincone A, Prigione A, Cramer T, Wamelink MMC, Campbell K, Cheung E, Olin-Sandoval V, Grüning N-M, Krüger A, Tauqeer Alam M, Keller MA, Breitenbach M, Brindle KM, Rabinowitz JD, Ralser M (2015) The return of metabolism: biochemistry and physiology of the pentose phosphate pathway. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 90:927–963. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tantirungkij M, Nakashima N, Seki T, Yoshida T (1993) Construction of xylose-assimilating Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Ferment Bioeng 75:83–88. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Toivari MH, Aristidou A, Ruohonen L, Penttilä M (2001) Conversion of xylose to ethanol by recombinant Saccharomyces cerevisiae: importance of xylulokinase (XKS1) and oxygen availability. Metab Eng 3:236–249. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Veras HCT, Parachin NS, Almeida JRM (2017) Comparative assessment of fermentative capacity of different xylose-consuming yeasts. Microb Cell Factories 16:153. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Walfridsson M, Hallborn J, Penttilä M, Keränen S, Hahn-Hägerdal B (1995) Xylose-metabolizing Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains overexpressing the TKL1 and TAL1 genes encoding the pentose phosphate pathway enzymes transketolase and transaldolase. Appl Environ Microbiol 61:4184–4190Google Scholar
  27. Zhang Y, Adams IP, Ratledge C (2007) Malic enzyme: the controlling activity for lipid production? Overexpression of malic enzyme in Mucor circinelloides leads to a 2.5-fold increase in lipid accumulation. Microbiology 153(7):2013–2025.
  28. Zhang G-C, Liu J-J, Ding W-T (2012) Decreased xylitol formation during xylose fermentation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae due to overexpression of water-forming NADH oxidase. Appl Environ Microbiol 78(4):1081–1086.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biotechnology, Graduate SchoolKorea UniversitySeoulKorea
  2. 2.School of Food Science and BiotechnologyKyungpook National UniversityDaeguKorea
  3. 3.Department of Bio and Fermentation Convergence Technology, BK21 PLUS ProgramKookmin UniversitySeoulKorea
  4. 4.Department of Food Science and NutritionDongseo UniversityBusanKorea
  5. 5.Department of Food Science and Human Nutritionthe University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations