Effects of Different Carbon Sources on Enzyme Production and Ultrastructure of Cellulosimicrobium cellulans
- 45 Downloads
The secretomes of the strain Cellulosimicrobium cellulans F16 grown on different carbon sources were analyzed by zymography, and the subcellular surface structures were extensively studied by electron microscope. The exo-cellulase and xylanase systems were sparse when cells were grown on soluble oligosaccharides, but were significantly increased when grown on complex and water-insoluble polysaccharides, such as Avicel, corn cob, and birchwood xylan. The cellulosome-like protuberant structures were clearly observed on the cell surfaces of strain F16 grown on cellulose, with diameters of 15–20 nm. Fibrous structures that connected the adjacent cells can be seen under microscope. Moreover, protuberances that adsorbed the cell to cellulose were also observed. As the adhesion of Cellulosimicrobium cellulans cells onto cellulose surfaces occurs via thick bacterial curdlan-type exopolysaccharides (EPS), such surface layer is potentially important in the digestion of insoluble substrates such as cellulose or hemicellulose, and the previously reported xylanosomes are part of such complex glycocalyx layer on the surface of the bacterial cell.
Scanning electron microscopy
Transmission electron microscopy
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31600641), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. DUT18RC(4)057), and the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2017YFC1702006).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 12.Garrity GM, Goodfellow M, Whitman WB, Kämpfer P, Busse H-J, Ludwig W, Trujillo M, Suzuki KI, Parte A (2012) The Actinobacteria. In: Bergey’s manual of systematic bacteriology, vol 5. 2 edn. Springer, New York, pp 995–1016Google Scholar
- 22.Bayer EA, Setter E, Lamed R (1985) Organization and distribution of the cellulosome in Clostridium thermocellum. J Bacteriol 163(2):552–559Google Scholar