Applications of computational science for understanding enzymatic deconstruction of cellulose
Introduction
Enzymatic deconstruction of plant cell walls to fermentable sugars is a primary, near-term option currently being pursued for the production of advanced biofuels. Driven by significant, international R&D efforts for biofuels, there exists a new wealth of experimental data about the chemistry and structure of plant cell walls and the mechanisms that cellulase and hemicellulase enzymes use to deconstruct cell wall polysaccharides [1]. It is noteworthy, however, that we still lack sufficient data to explain cell wall deconstruction, even though elucidation of these steps is crucial to develop enhanced conversion processes. Here, we discuss the challenges, opportunities, and early successes of theory and simulation to aid our understanding of mechanisms of plant cell wall deconstruction and in catalyst design. We also present, where appropriate, examples computational methods that can be applied to a given problem into the complex problem of cell wall deconstruction with the advent of improved simulation codes and computational power (Figure 1). We limit the scope to research of cellulose and cellulases from the last three years, but many of the discussions are extendable to hemicellulases, chitinases, and other carbohydrate-active enzymes [2•, 3•]. We hope that this opinion illustrates to computational researchers from other fields that new, exciting opportunities exist in biomass conversion, and to biomass researchers that their work can be greatly enhanced by using computational science.
Section snippets
Plant cell wall polymer models
The study of cellulose requires: (i) reliable structural models and (ii) accurate potentials to describe cellulose. Structural models of plant cellulose have been proposed with 36 cellulose chains per elementary fibril (microfibril), although this has not been directly verified experimentally [4]. Further experimental characterization of plant microfibrils will aid in the construction of more accurate representations of microfibrils for simulations. Two popular atomistic potentials for
Free cellulases
Free cellulases usually consist of one or more carbohydrate-binding modules (CBMs), one or more linkers, and catalytic domain (CD), as shown in Figure 2. The CDs of processive cellulases have tunnels for threading cellulose chains, whereas CDs of non-processive cellulases instead have clefts for binding to accessible chains [15]. Here we discuss the Trichoderma reesei Family 7 processive cellobiohydrolase (Cel7A), as it has been thoroughly characterized experimentally. Also, cellulases often
Cellulosomal enzymes
Complexed enzymes are found in some bacteria and a few fungi where multiple carbohydrate-active enzymes are bound to protein scaffolds via cohesin–dockerin interactions to form a complex termed ‘cellulosome’ [49]. There are many open questions at multiple resolutions regarding the cellulosome structure and function for which simulations can offer valuable insight. Here, we review several open questions across multiple length and time scales, which are summarized in Figure 3.
At low resolution,
Computational screening of cellulases for improved activity
The primary method used for improving cellulase activity to date is increasing protein thermal stability, for which computation offers significant benefits [58]. Heinzelman et al. computationally recombined 8 structural blocks from three wild-type Family 6 cellulases (Cel6A) to produce a library of Cel6A cellulases with improved thermal stability and activity [58]. High-throughput, computational screening tools like that used by Heinzelman et al. or with Rosetta [59] will aid the design of more
Conclusion
Knowledge of the elementary steps in cellulase action is essential for building enhanced models of cellulose deconstruction, which will in turn guide development of enhanced cellulase systems. Driven by the wealth of new experimental data on cellulases and cellulose, computer simulations are beginning to play an increasingly significant role in understanding the structure–function relationships of enzymatic cellulose deconstruction. By using a versatile portfolio of computational methods,
References and recommended reading
Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review, have been highlighted as:
• of special interest
•• of outstanding interest
Acknowledgements
We thank the DOE Office of the Biomass Program (Cel7A modeling), the DOE BER BioEnergy Science Center (cellulosome modeling), and the DOE ASCR SciDAC program for funding (cellulose modeling). EAB holds the Maynard I. and Elaine Wishner Chair of Bio-organic Chemistry at the Weizmann Institute of Science.
References (59)
- et al.
The Amber biomolecular simulation programs
J Comput Chem
(2005) - et al.
The binding specificity and affinity determinants of family 1 and family 3 cellulose binding modules
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
(2003) - et al.
Molecular modeling suggests induced fit of Family I carbohydrate-binding modules with a broken-chain cellulose surface
Protein Eng Design Select
(2007) - et al.
Lambda-dynamics free energy simulation methods
J Comput Chem
(2009) - et al.
Understanding the interactions of cellulose with ionic liquids: a molecular dynamics study
J Phys Chem B
(2010) - et al.
Computations of standard binding free energies with MD simulations
J Phys Chem B
(2009) - et al.
Free energy calculation from steered molecular dynamics simulations using Jarzynski's equality
J Chem Phys
(2003) - et al.
Structure and flexibility within proteins as identified through small angle X-ray scattering
Gen Physiol Biophys
(2009) - et al.
The fibronectin type 3-like repeat from the Clostridium thermocellum cellobiohydrolase CbhA promotes hydrolysis of cellulose by modifying its surface
Appl Environ Microbiol
(2002) - et al.
On the remarkable mechanostability of scaffoldins and the mechanical clamp motif
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
(2009)