↓ Skip to main content

Pyruvate production using engineered Escherichia coli

Overview of attention for article published in AMB Express, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
Title
Pyruvate production using engineered Escherichia coli
Published in
AMB Express, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13568-016-0259-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hironaga Akita, Nobutaka Nakashima, Tamotsu Hoshino

Abstract

Pyruvate plays an essential role in the central carbon metabolism of multiple organisms and is used as a raw material in the chemical, biochemical and pharmaceutical industries. To meet demand, large amounts of pyruvate are produced through fermentation processes. Here we describe a simple and efficient method for producing pyruvate in Escherichia coli. To stop carbon flux from pyruvate to fatty acids, the accBC genes, which encode the enzyme that catalyzes the first step of fatty acid biosynthesis and is essential for vegetative growth, were manipulated within the genome; its native promoter was replaced with the tetracycline (or doxycycline)-regulated promoter and the corresponding transcriptional regulator genes. The resulting strain grew normally in the presence of doxycycline, but showed poor growth upon withdrawal of doxycycline. Using this strain, we developed a high pyruvate producing strain (strain LAFCPCPt-accBC-aceE), in which the tetracycline-regulated promoter was also introduced upstream of aceE, and the ackA-pta, adhE, cra, ldhA, pflB and poxB genes were deleted. After determining the optimal culture conditions for this strain, the final pyruvate concentration reached 26.1 g L(-1) after 72 h with a theoretical yield of 55.6 %. These levels are high enough to indicate that the developed strain has the potential for application to industrial production of pyruvate.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
China 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Student > Master 8 16%
Researcher 7 14%
Professor 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 11 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 24%
Unspecified 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 13 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 October 2016.
All research outputs
#15,385,802
of 22,890,496 outputs
Outputs from AMB Express
#446
of 1,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,201
of 320,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AMB Express
#29
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,890,496 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,236 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,638 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.