Zum Anzeigen dieser Inhalte ist ein JoVE-Abonnement erforderlich. Melden Sie sich an oder starten Sie Ihre kostenlose Testversion.
In this study the expression of a target human recombinant protein in different production platforms was compared. We focused on traditional fermenter-based cultures and on plants, describing the set-up of each system and highlighting, on the basis of the reported results, the inherent limits and advantages for each platform.
Pflanzliche Systeme sind als wertvolle Plattform für die Produktion rekombinanter Proteine als Ergebnis ihrer gut dokumentierten Potential für die flexible und kostengünstige Herstellung von qualitativ hochwertigen, bioaktive Produkte.
In dieser Studie verglichen wir die Expression eines Ziel humanen rekombinanten Protein in herkömmlichen Fermenter basierenden Zellkulturen (Bakterien und Insekten) mit pflanzlichen Expressionssysteme, sowohl transient und stabil.
Für jede Plattform beschrieben wir den Aufbau, die Optimierung und die Länge der Herstellungsverfahren, der Endproduktqualität und der Ausbeute und wir geprüft vorläufigen Herstellungskosten, die spezifisch für das ausgewählte rekombinante Zielprotein fusionieren.
Insgesamt zeigen unsere Ergebnisse, dass die Bakterien zur Produktion des Zielproteins ungeeignet aufgrund ihrer Akkumulation in unlöslichen Einschlusskörpern. Andererseits sind Pflanzenbasierte Systeme flexiblen Plattformen tKappe ermöglichen die Produktion des ausgewählten Proteins zu niedrigeren Kosten als die Baculovirus / Insektenzellsystem. Insbesondere angezeigten stabilen transgenen Linien die höchste Ausbeute des Endproduktes und vorübergehend exprimierenden Pflanzen der schnellste Prozessentwicklung. Allerdings können nicht alle rekombinanten Proteinen aus pflanzlichen Systemen profitieren, aber die beste Produktionsplattform sollte empirisch mit einer Fall-zu-Fall-Ansatz bestimmt werden kann, wie hier beschrieben.
Recombinant proteins are commercially mass-produced in heterologous expression systems with the aid of emerging biotechnology tools. Key factors that have to be considered when choosing the heterologous expression system include: protein quality, functionality, process speed, yield and cost.
In the recombinant protein field, the market for pharmaceuticals is expanding rapidly and, consequently, most biopharmaceuticals produced today are recombinant. Proteins can be expressed in cell cultures of bacteria, yeasts, molds, mammals, plants and insects, as well as in plant systems (either via stable- or transient-transformation) and transgenic animals; each expression system has its inherent advantages and limitations and for each target recombinant protein the optimal production system has to be carefully evaluated.
Plant-based platforms are arising as an important alternative to traditional fermenter-based systems for safe and cost-effective recombinant protein production. Although downstream processing costs are comparable to those of microbial and mammalian cells, the lower up-front investment required for commercial production in plants and the potential economy of scale, provided by cultivation over large areas, are key advantages.
We evaluated plants as bioreactors for the expression of the 65 kDa isoform of human glutamic acid decarboxylase (hGAD65), one of the major autoantigen in Type 1 autoimmune diabetes (T1D). hGAD65 is largely adopted as a marker, both for classifying and monitoring the progression of the disease and its role in T1D prevention is currently under investigation in clinical trials. If these trials are successful, the global demand for recombinant hGAD65 will increase dramatically.
Here, we focus on the expression of the enzymatically inactive counterpart of hGAD65, hGAD65mut, a mutant generated by substituting the lysine residue that binds the cofactor PLP (pyridoxal-5'-phosphate) with an arginine residue (K396R)1.
hGAD65mut retains its immunogenicity and, in plant and insect cells, accumulates up to ten-fold higher than hGAD65, its wild-type counterpart. It was hypothesized that the enzymatic activity of hGAD65 interferes with plant cell metabolism to such an extent that it suppresses its own synthesis, whereas hGAD65mut, the enzymatically-inactive form, can be accumulated in plant cells to higher levels.
For the expression of hGAD65mut, the use of different technologies, widely used in plant biotechnology, was explored here and compared to traditional expression platforms (Escherichia coli and Baculovirus/insect cell-based).
In this work, the recombinant platforms developed for the expression of hGAD65mut comprising traditional and plant-based systems were reviewed and compared on the basis of process speed and yield, and of final product quality and functionality.
1. Konstruktion von Expressionsvektoren
2. Expression rekombinanter Proteine
3. Expression rekombinanter Proteine Analysen
Eine Versuchsanordnung für die heterologe Expression eines rekombinanten Zielproteins in verschiedenen Produktionssystemen wird hier beschrieben. Der erste Schwerpunkt war der Aufbau der verschiedenen Plattformen durch Festlegung der optimalen Bedingungen für die Expression des Zielproteins in jedem System.
Die Expression des Target-Proteins, hGAD65mut, wurde dreifach induzierten E. coli-Kulturen. Nach 3 h der Expression bei 37 ° C wurden die Bakterienzellen durch Zentrifugation ...
Bakterienzellen, Baculovirus / Insektenzellen und Pflanzen: In dieser Studie wurden drei verschiedene Plattformen für die Expression eines rekombinanten humanen Proteins verglichen. (- MagnICON und pK7WG2 basiert - und stabile dh transient) Die Anlage-basierte Plattform wurde durch die Nutzung von drei weit verbreitete Ausdruck Technologien erforscht. Der für dieses Experiment, hGAD65mut, ausgewählten Zielproteins wurde zuvor in verschiedenen Systemen 13 zum Ausdruck gebracht, und seine Herstellun...
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.
This work was supported by the COST action ‘Molecular pharming: Plants as a production platform for high-value proteins’ FA0804. The Authors thank Dr Anatoli Giritch and Prof. Yuri Gleba for providing the MagnICON vectors for research purposes.
Name | Company | Catalog Number | Comments |
Yeast extract | Sigma | Y1333 | |
Tryptone | Formedium | TRP03 | |
Agar Bacteriological Grade | Applichem | A0949 | |
Sf-900 II SFM medium | Gibco | 10902-088 | |
Grace’s Insect Medium, unsupplemented | Gibco | 11595-030 | |
Cellfectin II Reagent | Invitrogen | 10362-100 | |
MS medium including vitamins | Duchefa Biochemie | M0222 | |
Sucrose | Duchefa Biochemie | S0809 | |
Plant agar | Duchefa Biochemie | P1001 | |
Ampicillin sodium | Duchefa Biochemie | A0104 | Toxic |
Gentamycin sulphate | Duchefa Biochemie | G0124 | Toxic |
Ganciclovir | Invitrogen | I2562-023 | |
Carbenicillin disodium | Duchefa Biochemie | C0109 | Toxic |
Kanamycin sulfate | Sigma | K4000 | Toxic |
Rifampicin | Duchefa Biochemie | R0146 | Toxic – 25 mg/ml stock in DMSO |
Streptomycin sulfate | Duchefa Biochemie | S0148 | Toxic |
Spectinomycin dihydrochloride | Duchefa Biochemie | S0188 | |
IPTG (Isopropil-β-D-1-tiogalattopiranoside) | Sigma | I5502 | Toxic |
MES hydrate | Sigma | M8250 | |
MgCl2 | Biochemical | 436994U | |
Acetosyringone | Sigma | D134406 | Toxic – 0.1 M stock in DMSO |
Syringe (1 ml) | Terumo | ||
MgSO4 | Fluka | 63136 | |
BAP (6-Benzylaminopurine) | Sigma | B3408 | Toxic |
NAA (Naphtalene acetic acid) | Duchefa Biochemie | N0903 | Irritant |
Cefotaxime | Mylan generics | ||
Trizma base | Sigma | T1503 | Adjust pH with 1 N HCl to make Tris-HCl buffer |
HCl | Sigma | H1758 | Corrosive |
NaCl | Sigma | S3014 | 1 M stock |
KCl | Sigma | P9541 | |
Na2HPO4 | Sigma | S7907 | |
KH2PO4 | Sigma | P9791 | |
PMSF (Phenylmethanesulfonylfluoride) | Sigma | P7626 | Corrosive, toxic |
Urea | Sigma | U5378 | |
β-mercaptoethanol | Sigma | M3148 | Toxic |
Tween-20 | Sigma | P5927 | |
Hepes | Sigma | H3375 | |
DTT (Dithiothreitol) | Sigma | D0632 | Toxic – 1 M stock, store at -20 °C |
CHAPS | Duchefa Biochemie | C1374 | Toxic |
Plant protease inhibitor cocktail | Sigma | P9599 | Do not freeze/thaw too many times |
SDS (Sodium dodecyl sulphate) | Sigma | L3771 | Flammable, toxic, corrosive – 10% stock |
Glycerol | Sigma | G5516 | |
Brilliant Blue R-250 | Sigma | B7920 | |
Isopropanol | Sigma | 24137 | Flammable |
Acetic acid | Sigma | 27221 | Corrosive |
Anti-Glutamic acid decarboxylase 65/67 | Sigma | G5163 | Do not freeze/thaw too many times |
Horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugate anti-rabbit antibody | Sigma | A6154 | Do not freeze/thaw too many times |
Sf9 Cells | Life Technologies | 11496 | |
BL21 Competent E.coli | New England Biolabs | C2530H | |
Protein A Sepharose | Sigma | P2545 | |
Cell culture plates | Sigma | CLS3516 | |
Radio Immuno Assay kit | Techno Genetics | 12650805 | Radioactive material |
Genehmigung beantragen, um den Text oder die Abbildungen dieses JoVE-Artikels zu verwenden
Genehmigung beantragenThis article has been published
Video Coming Soon
Copyright © 2025 MyJoVE Corporation. Alle Rechte vorbehalten