Page 58 - Read Online
P. 58

Page 10 of 15                Sasaki et al. Microbiome Res Rep 2023;2:12  https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/mrr.2023.08

               Table 2. Substrate specificities of AAfase, GAfase, and GAfase N119Y mutant
                                                         AAfase       GAfase        GAfase N119Y
                Substrate
                                                         (U/mg)       (U/mg)        (U/mg)
                α-D-Galp-(1→3)-α-L-Araf-OMe              0.0776       33.1          0.363
                β-L-Arap-(1→3)-α-L-Araf-OMe              15.1         0.0595        7.87



































                Figure 4. Comparison of amino acid residues at the catalytic site among Bifidobacterium GH39s. A: Comparison of amino acid residues
                at the catalytic sites, according to a previous  report [24] . Catalytic residues (red) and residues with variation (yellow) across GH39
                sequences are presented. The phylogenetic tree depicted on the left was constructed via the neighbor-joining method based on aligned
                Bifidobacterium GH39 sequences. GH39 sequences were aligned using the Clustal W program via MEGA11 software; B: The predicted
                structures of AAfase (left) and GAfase (right) are depicted as a surface representation. AlphaFold2 (ColabFold) was used to obtain the
                                                                                                       116
                structural model with default settings. Predicted catalytic residues are highlighted in red, and different amino acid residues (Tyr  in
                          119
                AAfase and Asn  in GAfase) are highlighted in yellow.
               [Figure 5]. Among AAfase-carrier strains, proteins encoded in the AAfase gene cluster share over 99% of
               sequence identity with the corresponding proteins from B. pseudocatenulatum MCC10289 [Figure 5A, right
               table]. The in vitro assimilation test of β-L-Arap-(1→3)-L-Ara and larch AGP was performed by measuring
               the increase in absorbance and conducting residual sugar analysis in the culture supernatant via TLC and
               HPAEC-PAD. As a result, only B. pseudocatenulatum MCC10289 showed growth [Figure 5B, left], and
               HPAEC-PAD  analysis  indicated  that  β-L-Arap-(1→3)-L-Ara  was  completely  utilized  by  B.
               pseudocatenulatum  MCC10289  [Figure 5C]. Unexpectedly,  other  AAfase-carrier  strains,  B.
               pseudocatenulatum MCC10285 and B. kashiwanohense MCC10250 did not grow and utilize β-L-Arap-(1→
               3)-L-Ara. The in vitro assimilation test of larch AGP showed that MCC10289 exhibited higher absorbance
               than B. pseudocatenulatum MCC10285, MCC10311, and JCM1200. As β-L-Arap-(1→3)-L-Ara was present
               only in ~1.2% (w/w) of the total sugar content in larch AGP , the difference was not so large because of the
                                                                  [8]
               insufficient amount of β-L-Arap-(1→3)-L-Ara. Interestingly, B. kashiwanohense MCC10250, which does not
               grow on β-L-Arap-(1→3)-L-Ara, showed good growth on larch AGP [Figure 5B], and some released
               oligosaccharides were detected in the culture medium after 48 h via TLC [Supplementary Figure 5].
   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63