| Title |
Improved conversion of ginsenoside Rb1 to compound K by semi-rational design of Sulfolobus solfataricus β-glycosidase
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
AMB Express, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13568-017-0487-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kyung-Chul Shin, Hye-Yeon Choi, Min-Ju Seo, Deok-Kun Oh |
| Abstract |
Ginsenoside compound K has been used as a key nutritional and cosmetic component because of its anti-fatigue and skin anti-aging effects. β-Glycosidase from Sulfolobus solfataricus (SS-BGL) is known as the most efficient enzyme for compound K production. The hydrolytic pathway from ginsenoside Rb1 to compound K via Rd and F2 is the most important because Rb1 is the most abundant component in ginseng extract. However, the enzymatic conversion of ginsenoside Rd to F2 is a limiting step in the hydrolytic pathway because of the relatively low activity for Rd. A V209 residue obtained from error-prone PCR was related to Rd-hydrolyzing activity, and a docking pose showing an interaction with Val209 was selected from numerous docking poses. W361F was obtained by rational design using the docking pose that exhibited 4.2-fold higher activity, 3.7-fold higher catalytic efficiency, and 3.1-fold lower binding energy for Rd than the wild-type enzyme, indicating that W361F compensated for the limiting step. W361F completely converted Rb1 to compound K with a productivity of 843 mg l(-1) h(-1) in 80 min, and showed also 7.4-fold higher activity for the flavanone, hesperidin, than the wild-type enzyme. Therefore, the W361F variant SS-BGL can be useful for hydrolysis of other glycosides as well as compound K production from Rb1, and semi-rational design is a useful tool for enhancing hydrolytic activity of β-glycosidase. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 21% |
| Professor | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 14% |
| Researcher | 1 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 7% |
| Design | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 43% |
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 05 October 2017.
All research outputs
#15,481,147
of 23,005,189 outputs
Outputs from AMB Express
#447
of 1,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,080
of 323,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AMB Express
#21
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,005,189 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 1,240 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 323,110 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 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.