Pharmaceutical grade trypsin is in ever-increasing demand for medical and industrial applications. Improving the efficiency of existing biotechnological manufacturing processes is therefore paramount. When produced biotechnologically, trypsinogen-the inactive precursor of trypsin-is advantageous, since active trypsin would impair cell viability. To study factors affecting cell physiology and the production of trypsinogen in fed-batch cultures, we built a fusion protein of porcine trypsinogen and enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP) in Pichia pastoris. The experiments were performed with two different pH values (5.0 and 5.9) and two constant specific growth rates (0.02 and 0.04 1/h), maintained using exponential addition of methanol. All the productivity data presented rely on an active determination of trypsin obtained by proteolysis of the trypsinogen produced. The pH of the medium did not affect cell growth, but significantly influenced specific production of trypsinogen: A 1.7-fold higher concentration of trypsinogen was achieved at pH 5.9 (64 mg/L at 0.02 1/h) compared to pH 5.0. EGFP was primarily used to facilitate detection of intracellular protein over the biosynthetic time course. Using flow cytometry with fluorescence detection, cell disruption was avoided, and protein extraction and purification prior to analysis were unnecessary. However, Western blot and SDS-PAGE showed that cleavage of EGFP-trypsinogen fusion protein occurred, probably caused by Pichia-endogenous proteases. The fluorescence analysis did therefore not accurately represent the actual trypsinogen concentration. However, we gained new experimentally-relevant insights, which can be used to avoid misinterpretation of tracking and quantifying as well as online-monitoring of proteins with the frequently used fluorescent tags.

Department of Biochemistry and Microbiology University of Chemistry and Technology Prague Technická 5 166 28 Prague Czech Republic

Department of Biotechnology University of Chemistry and Technology Prague Technická 5 166 28 Prague 6 Czech Republic

Institute of Chemistry and Biotechnology Zurich University of Applied Sciences Grüentalstrasse 14 8820 Wädenswil Switzerland

See more in PubMed

Biotechnol Bioeng. 2000 Oct 5;70(1):1-8 PubMed

FEMS Yeast Res. 2017 Nov 1;17(7): PubMed

J Biotechnol. 2003 May 8;102(3):281-90 PubMed

Biotechnol Adv. 2018 Jan - Feb;36(1):182-195 PubMed

J Biotechnol. 2012 Jan;157(1):180-8 PubMed

Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 1994 Jul;58(7):1245-57 PubMed

Biotechnol Lett. 2015 Jan;37(1):161-7 PubMed

Biotechnol Prog. 2013 Jan-Feb;29(1):11-6 PubMed

J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2012 Nov;39(11):1651-62 PubMed

Biochemistry. 1983 Mar 15;22(6):1459-65 PubMed

Appl Environ Microbiol. 2003 Feb;69(2):1108-13 PubMed

Biotechnol Adv. 2015 Nov 1;33(6 Pt 2):1177-93 PubMed

World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2014 Jun;30(6):1819-27 PubMed

FEMS Yeast Res. 2005 Jun;5(9):851-7 PubMed

Biotechnol Bioeng. 2010 Aug 15;106(6):918-27 PubMed

Biotechnol Bioeng. 2005 Jan 5;89(1):102-12 PubMed

J Biotechnol. 2007 Mar 10;128(4):824-37 PubMed

Microb Cell Fact. 2009 Feb 10;8:13 PubMed

Biotechnol Lett. 2008 Aug;30(8):1409-14 PubMed

Biotechnol Prog. 2009 Sep-Oct;25(5):1310-6 PubMed

Microb Cell Fact. 2007 May 18;6:15 PubMed

Curr Protoc Cell Biol. 2005 Jul;Chapter 21:21.4.1-21.4.13 PubMed

BMC Biotechnol. 2012 Sep 21;12:65 PubMed

Biotechnol Prog. 2014 May-Jun;30(3):728-35 PubMed

Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 1995 Mar;59(3):439-44 PubMed

J Gen Physiol. 1934 Mar 20;17(4):591-615 PubMed

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1964 Feb;51:301-8 PubMed

Chem Rev. 2002 Dec;102(12):4525-48 PubMed

Biotechnol Prog. 2003 May-Jun;19(3):794-802 PubMed

Appl Environ Microbiol. 2010 Jul;76(13):4486-96 PubMed

Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011 Dec;94(3):311-21 PubMed

Bioresour Technol. 2018 Jan;247:81-87 PubMed

Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2014 Jun;98(12):5301-17 PubMed

Chembiochem. 2018 Jan 4;19(1):7-21 PubMed

Protein Expr Purif. 2010 Jul;72(1):113-24 PubMed

Protein Expr Purif. 2015 Oct;114:149-55 PubMed