Next Article in Journal
Preparation of Fish Skin Gelatin-Based Nanofibers Incorporating Cinnamaldehyde by Solution Blow Spinning
Next Article in Special Issue
Glycoform Modification of Secreted Recombinant Glycoproteins through Kifunensine Addition during Transient Vacuum Agroinfiltration
Previous Article in Journal
A Metabolomic Approach to Predict Breast Cancer Behavior and Chemotherapy Response
Previous Article in Special Issue
Separation Options for Phosphorylated Osteopontin from Transgenic Microalgae Chlamydomonas reinhardtii
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 19
Issue 2
10.3390/ijms19020616
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Expression of Lectins in Heterologous Systems

by
Dania Martínez-Alarcón
1,
Alejandro Blanco-Labra
1 and
Teresa García-Gasca
2,*
1
Departamento de Biotecnología y Bioquímica, Centro de Investigación y Estudios Avanzados del IPN, Km. 9.6 Libramiento Norte, Carretera Irapuato-León, Irapuato 36824, Guanajuato, Mexico
2
Facultad de Ciencias Naturales, Universidad Autónoma de Querétaro, Av. de las Ciencias s/n, Juriquilla, Santiago de Querétaro 76230, Querétaro, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19(2), 616; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19020616
Submission received: 4 December 2017 / Revised: 24 December 2017 / Accepted: 27 December 2017 / Published: 21 February 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recombinant Proteins)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Lectins are proteins that have the ability to recognize and bind in a reversible and specific way to free carbohydrates or glycoconjugates of cell membranes. For these reasons, they have been extensively used in a wide range of industrial and pharmacological applications. Currently, there is great interest in their production on a large scale. Unfortunately, conventional techniques do not provide the appropriate platform for this purpose and therefore, the heterologous production of lectins in different organisms has become the preferred method in many cases. Such systems have the advantage of providing better yields as well as more homogeneous and better-defined properties for the resultant products. However, an inappropriate choice of the expression system can cause important structural alterations that have repercussions on their biological activity since the specificity may lay in their post-translational processing, which depends largely on the producing organism. The present review aims to examine the most representative studies in the area, exposing the four most frequently used systems (bacteria, yeasts, plants and animal cells), with the intention of providing the necessary information to determine the strategy to follow in each case as well as their respective advantages and disadvantages.

1. Introduction

Lectins are proteins that include at least one non-catalytic domain with the ability of binding in a reversible and specific way to carbohydrates that are free or bound to cell membranes, such as glycoproteins, glycolipids or polysaccharides [1,2,3]. The recognition of these carbohydrates is highly specific and allows these proteins to differentially bind to certain molecules and cells [4,5]. Due to this selectivity, lectins have been widely used for the investigation of complex carbohydrates and changes occurring in cellular interactions during physiological and pathological processes in recent years, providing evidence for a wide spectrum of industrial and pharmacological applications. Therefore, there is an increasing interest both in their purification and in their characterization. Chromatographic techniques have been most widely used for the purification of lectins from their natural sources. However, such techniques usually provide very low yields and they are occasionally unable to discriminate between isoforms of the same lectin. Therefore, they are obtained as mixtures, which provides a large range of uncertainty. In this sense, the production of recombinant lectins by genetic engineering techniques has the advantage of providing single proteins, with better yields that allow for their precise characterization [6,7].
There are many reports on the production of recombinant lectins, particularly of plant and animal origin, since they have been shown to have a broader spectrum of applications. Yeasts and bacteria are the preferred system used to express these lectins. However, recombinant lectins have also been expressed in plants and mammalian cells, although this occurred less frequently. The heterologous production of lectins in microorganisms offers simple systems that provide good yields. Unfortunately, such products are often not soluble or not properly processed. In an attempt to circumvent these disadvantages, a number of alternatives have emerged, ranging from refolding [8,9,10], the inclusion of solubilizing peptides [11,12] and the modification of the microorganism glycosylation patterns [13]. Some of these modifications include the expression of human enzymes in yeast strains of Pichia pastoris, which are commercially available. On the other hand, mammalian and plant cells are more complex systems that offer a more complete spectrum of post-translational modifications. However, their manipulation is considerably more difficult and costly than yeast and bacteria [14].
Each system presents advantages and disadvantages. The success depends on the analysis of different factors, including the producing organism, and the characteristics of the lectin to be expressed. In this present study, we present the most representative studies in the field of the production of recombinant lectins and link this data through an analysis that aims to contribute to determining the best strategy to follow in each case.

2. Synthesis and Processing of Lectins

Lectins can be found in all kingdoms: animalia, plantae, fungi, protista, archea, bacteria and also viruses [5,15]. Their biological functions are highly variable and depend on the organism of origin. For example, it is known that lectins in plants play an important role during nodulation [16] and as part of the defence mechanisms against insects and pathogens [17]. In animals, they are involved in processes of cell migration and adhesion as well as in the control of glycoprotein production and phagocytosis [18]. Furthermore, in bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites, they are better known as adhesins and their main function is related to the adhesion and colonization processes [19]. Some toxins produced by microorganisms have been considered as possibly belonging to the family of lectins, since they have a recognition domain for carbohydrates (CRD) that serves as an anchor to their target, to then exert their toxic actions. However, these molecules do not satisfy the lectin requirements according to the definitions of Franz and Goldstein [20,21].
Bacteria are relatively simple in their protein synthesis because they lack cellular organelles specialized in post-processing complex proteins and thus synthesize all of their proteins in the cytosol [22]. On the other hand, eukaryotes are significantly more complex. As in prokaryotes, all their proteins, except those synthesized in mitochondria and chloroplasts, begin to be synthesized by free ribosomes in the cytoplasm. Some proteins contain a sequence called “signal peptide”, which is recognized by a signal recognition particle (SRP). The SRP stops the translation and leads the ribosome/protein complex to the external side of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane. At this point, the complex is recognized by the SRP receptor, which forms a channel through which the protein is introduced. Once this has happened, translation resumes and the protein is directed towards the ER lumen, where the “signal peptide” is cleaved [23,24]. This is the case for most animal and plant lectins. However, in some cases, such as in the lectins from Nicotiana tabacum and Galanthus nivalis, they are directly synthesized in the cytosol and therefore contain neither peptide signal nor glycosylations [15].
There are considerable differences between eukaryotic lectins synthesized in ER and those that have been synthesized in the cytoplasm. First, the ER lumen is a highly oxidizing environment that favours the formation of disulphide bonds (S–S), while the cytosol maintains the cysteine residues in their reduced form (–SH) [9,25]. On the other hand, the ER lumen contains accessory proteins involved in proper protein folding [23] and has the necessary proteases to cleave the lectin precursors that need to be processed to their functional form, such as in the case of ConA from Canavalia ensiformis and favina from Vicia faba [25]. In addition, glycosylation takes place in the ER and Golgi apparatus and only lectins with the corresponding signal peptide may present glycosidic antennae. These lectins are particularly resistant to temperature and pH changes due to the attached carbohydrates and the disulphide bonds [26]. Simple forms of glycosylation have also been identified in bacteria [27].
It is important to note that not all lectins synthesized in ER are necessarily glycosylated. For N-glycosylation to occur, a primary oligosaccharide of 14 residues (2N-acetylglucosamines, three glucoses and nine mannoses) must first be transferred to a sequence of Asn–X–Ser–Thr, where X can be any amino acid except proline [14,28]. This sequence is better known as “Sequon” [28]. Once the proteins have been properly processed in ER, they are embedded in vesicles, which are transported to the Golgi apparatus, where the editing of N-glycosidic antennae continues. On the other hand, the O-glycosylation process requires the presence of non-phosphorylated serine or threonine residues and also depends on the structural conformation of the already-folded protein [14].

3. Classification of Lectins

Lectins are a very heterogeneous group of proteins, with the ability to selectively bind carbohydrates [29]. They have been classified based on different criteria, such as taxonomic origin, cellular localization, specificity of carbohydrate recognition, functions and structure [30]. For the majority, there are well-defined parameters that allow lectins to be considered in all living beings. However, classifications based on structure are usually established for a defined set of organisms, such as plant lectins [31] and animal lectins [32]. Table 1 lists examples of some of these classifications.

4. Carbohydrate Recognition

Lectins have complex structures that may or may not include prosthetic groups, such as ions and glycosylations, but their carbohydrate binding capacity is essentially attributed to a typically globular domain termed the “carbohydrate recognition domain” (CRD), which is defined by a conserved group of residues that determine its conformation and function [29]. At times, they also require divalent cations, which form ligand coordination bonds or help to stabilize the CRD by binding the adjacent amino acid [35]. The adjacent domains to the CRD and their non-protein components (if any) can influence the final structure of the protein and its ability to recognize carbohydrates [6,35,36].
In addition to lectins, many other proteins have the ability to interact with carbohydrates, including enzymes, antibodies, some transporters and periplasmic proteins from bacteria. These proteins differ from lectins because their CRDs are deep clefts and they bind with a high affinity that is typically in the order of sub-micromolar dissociation constants. In contrast, lectin CRDs tend to be shallow indentations with lower affinities that are usually of the millimolar order. The selectivity of the CRD is given by combining hydrogen bonds with the hydroxyl groups of the sugar and a Van der Waals packing, which often includes the coverage of a hydrophobic side of the sugar against the side chains of aromatic amino acids. This affinity may be dramatically increased with the pooling of individual binding sites, such as in lectin polypeptide oligomer. In addition, the geometry of such oligomers helps to distinguish arrangements of cell surface polysaccharides and glycoconjugate crosslinks in some cases [35].

5. Extraction and Purification of Lectins

Traditionally, lectins are isolated from their natural sources by directly extracting them using buffer solutions from finely macerated tissues [37]. Depending on the type of sample, it may be frequently necessary to pre-treat the sample using large quantities of acids or organic solvents to remove lipids and other interfering substances [38,39]. Once the crude extracts have been obtained, it is necessary to precipitate the lectins, either using ammonium sulphate or ethanol, before centrifuging the sample to separate the parts of the proteins that are not of interest [4]. The fraction collected may be purified by different techniques, such as gel-filtration chromatography, ion exchange chromatography, hydrophobicity chromatography and mainly affinity chromatography, because of the ability of lectins to selectively bind to sugars [40].
It is important to note that the similarity between isoforms of lectins hinders their complete separation, so they are usually obtained as semi-pure fractions [6]. It must be taken into account that although some of the isoforms only slightly differ in the functional properties, these differences significantly affect their biological activity in other cases. Two isoforms of Phaseolus vulgaris lectin (PHA-E and PHA-L) exhibit significant differences regarding their mitogenic effect on leukocytes and in their anti-insecticidal effect. Furthermore, it has been observed that Phaseolus acutifolius contains at least two different types of lectins with different activity [41,42,43]. These differences may be due to a large number of factors, such as the imprecise cut-off of the C-terminal mature polypeptides, differential expression in tissues and/or developmental stages and allelic variation when the material is not genetically uniform [6].
The yields of purification of lectins from the previously described techniques are generally low and depend on the source. For example, the highest performance found in animals was 9.4 mg per each 100 g of carp gills (Hypophthalmichthys nobilis) [44], while the lowest was 0.35 mg per 100 g of jelly from Nemopilema nomurai [45], with an average of 2.92 mg per 100 g of animal tissue. In the case of fungi, the recovery of lectins is very low, so it is considered that the production from these organisms is impractical [40]. These proteins are mainly located in the fruiting bodies, which are multicellular structures of the fungi responsible for producing spores. A yield of 2.6 mg per 100 g has been reported for the fresh fruiting bodies of Pleurocybella porrigens [46] and 15.3 mg per 100 g for the dry fruiting bodies of Inocybe umbrinella [47]. On the other hand, plants seem to have the best yields of 13–107 mg per 100 g of seed, especially legumes [48,49]. However, in the case of non-leguminous plants, the lectin content is lower, such as the yield of 3.3 mg lectin per 100 g seed from Hibiscus mutabilis [50]. Table 2 compiles some examples of lectins purified by traditional techniques and their yields.

6. Production of Recombinant Lectins

Obtaining heterologous proteins could facilitate the cost-effective production of bioactive lectins for pharmaceutical purposes [56]. These systems offer higher yields than conventional purification methods, reducing costs and time. Furthermore, it may avoid the problem of contamination with other compounds [15], allowing only a single protein to be obtained. In addition, this methodology solves the problem of separating isoforms by producing a single product with defined properties. This also allows for the study of the relation sequence function by directed mutagenesis [6]. The most important models that have been proposed so far for the heterologous production of lectins are bacteria and yeasts, while other models have also been studied, such as mammalian cells, plants and insects [14]. Each model offers advantages and disadvantages.

6.1. Production of Recombinant Lectins in Bacteria

E. coli was the first and the most widely used organism to produce recombinant proteins due to many advantages, including its simplicity, the knowledge of its physiology and its genome as well as its rapid rate of duplication [14,57]. However, it is not always the best alternative for the production of certain lectins, due to the lack of intracellular organelles. Thus, the proper processing of these proteins may not occur. Another disadvantage of producing proteins in bacteria is that those that are large in size or expressed in high concentrations tend to form insoluble cytoplasmic aggregates, which are better known as “inclusion bodies” [10,14,58]. In these “inclusion bodies”, the processed protein could be inactivated with structural artefacts added, such as non-native disulphide bonds and free non-habitual cysteines [14]. This problem has been approached by some studies where they propose the processing of inclusion bodies by the solubilisation with denaturing agents, before later renaturing the protein to its active form [8]. It is important to note that despite the limitations, the successful production of eukaryotic lectins in E. coli has been reported, where even when the final product is not identical to the native lectin, the biological activity is preserved. E. coli was used to produce a lectin of about 14.5 kDa, which is normally expressed in roots of rice (Oryza sativa L.) in response to salt stress (SALT) [5]. The resultant lectin maintained its biological activity (agglutination units of 0.078 µg/mL) with a similar molecular weight to the native counterpart. This is an interesting result considering that most of the plant lectins produced in bacteria usually lose their biological activity. In order to obtain more information about the processing of this lectin, we analysed the SALT sequence with the NetNGlyc 1.0 (DTU Bioinformatics, Lyngby, Denmark) and SignalP 4.0 programs (DTU Bioinformatics, Lyngby, Denmark). We found that although it contains a potential site for N-glycosylation at position 101, it lacks the ER signal peptide, which suggests that SALT is synthesized in the cytoplasm, where post-translational changes are not produced and therefore, there will be no considerable changes in its biological activity. However, it is important to note that the protein was obtained into inclusion bodies and it was necessary to treat the protein with sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS) to bring it to its soluble form and later renature it, so the final yield was 14.6 mg of recombinant lectin/L in the culture medium.
As the solubilisation/renaturation technique sometimes results in a significant decrease in yield, new strategies have been proposed to avoid them, such as pH modulation, growing temperatures below the standard and the fusion of the protein with peptides that enhances the expression and solubility. A variety of different peptides have been tested for this purpose and thus far, the SUMO peptide (small ubiquitin-related modifier) has been shown to be the most effective [10,11,12]. In a recent work, the SUMO peptide was coupled to the coding sequence of the ASAL lectin from garlic (Allium sativum), which is a mannose-binding glycoprotein with a 25-kDa size. Sixty percent of the protein was excreted in a soluble form, achieving a final production yield of 5 mg of recombinant lectin/L of culture medium. By analysing the ASAL sequence with the NetNGlyc 1.0 and SignalP 4.0 programs, we found that it contains two possible N-glycosylation sites in positions 151 and 168 and also contains a signal peptide of 30 amino acids. This suggests that ASAL is synthesized in ER. The authors reported structural and carbohydrate recognition alteration, although these alterations did not affect its biological activity. The modified strains of E. coli were obtained in order to avoid such problems where synthetic routes for the addition of eukaryotic N-glycosylations [59] and oxidation of disulphide bonds in the cytoplasm were included [60]. The AD494 strain, a K-12 mutant in thioredoxin reductase (trxB) or the Origami strain (also derived from K-12), contains a further mutation in the glutathione reductase (gor) [61].

6.2. Production of Recombinant Lectins in Yeast

Yeasts are suitable organisms for the heterologous expression of eukaryotic proteins, since they combine the easy genetic manipulation and rapid growth of prokaryotic organisms, with a subcellular machinery necessary for post-translational modifications, such as glycosylations, disulphide bonds and proteolytic processing [62]. The molecular understanding of the physiology and genetics of Saccharomyces cerevisiae makes it suitable to initially be considered as one of the most promising expression systems for this purpose [62]. However, in the case of glycoproteins, there are multiple drawbacks associated with the use of this model, such as the high antigenicity of their glycosylations [14], accumulation of product within vacuoles and cytoplasm [63,64], incomplete processing of their signalling peptides [63] and poor performance [6]. As a result, Saccharomyces shows poor expression of glycoproteins and has been replaced with Pichia pastoris, which is capable of producing glycoproteins in high concentrations and also excreting them, allowing the production of larger quantities in the culture medium [64]. P. pastoris also offers the possibility of using the methanol-regulated promoter (AOX1) [15] and it does not add α-1-3 mannose residues, which are responsible for the antigenic nature of glycoproteins excreted by S. cerevisiae [63,65]. In addition, the N-oligosaccharides in P. pastoris appears to be similar, at least in size, to the oligosaccharides of higher organisms [66]. In recent years, this discovery has opened up a range of possibilities for the expression of glycoproteins in P. pastoris and has proven to be an excellent system to produce some types of lectins that could be directed into a secretory pathway.
P. pastoris was used to produce a lectin from Nicotiana tabacum, which is better known as “Nictaba” [15]. In its native form, Nictaba is a homodimer of 19 kDa, whose synthesis is carried out only under the induction by jazmonates. The coding sequence was fused to the S. cereviciae α-factor, which is a peptide that targets the protein to the ER and allows the protein to be included in the secretory pathway. Although the authors report incomplete α-factor cleavage, the binding activity of the recombinant product was similar to its native counterpart and the final yield was 6 mg of recombinant protein/L of culture medium. We had analysed the sequence of this lectin with the NetNGlyc 1.0 and SignalP 4.0 programs and we found that there is no presence of signal peptide or possible glycosylation sites, so that Nictaba is a lectin that naturally occurs in free polysomes in the cytosol. However, it contains potential glycosylation sites, indicating that Pichia pastoris is a good system for obtaining heterologous lectins. However, it is necessary to consider that for lectins produced in the cytosol and include possible glycosylation sequences, the heterologous expression in yeast using signalling peptides, such as α-factor, could represent a disadvantage. This is because the addition of non-habitual N-glycosidic antennae could interfere with its activity. In such cases, it is advisable to make point mutations over the sequons to try to avoid aberrant glycosylations. Other studies report incomplete processing of the N-terminal end when α-factor for the excretion of heterologous proteins is added [6,7,14,62,67]. In this sense, there have been other studies that propose new peptides for the successful excretion of proteins into the extracellular space. Two legume lectins (P. vulgaris PHA-E and G. nivalis GNA) in P. pastoris were expressed using the N-terminal phytohemagglutinin of P. vulgaris as the signal peptide in order to compare the excretion and post-processing effectiveness in relation to the α-factor of S. cerevisiae [6]. The results show that the PHA-E signal peptide directed the protein secretion when they were correctly processed at the N-terminal extension, while proteins secreted under the α-factor peptide control presented heterogeneous N-terminal extensions. This suggests that the PHA-E signal peptide may have a wider utility in the production of recombinant proteins in Pichia.
As in bacteria, modified Pichia strains are capable of producing eukaryotic glycoproteins. The Pichia strain was modified by eliminating four endogenous genes and adding 14 heterologous glycoenzyme genes to allow them to replicate the N-glycosylation steps in humans [13]. Recently, some studies have also focused on the engineering of O-glycosylation to produce sialylated O-linked glycans in yeast [10].

6.3. Production of Recombinant Lectins in Plants

The transformation and modern techniques of plant culture allow the production of genetically-modified plants to be used as bioreactors for the production of recombinant proteins and/or industrially relevant metabolites [68]. As eukaryotes, plants provide a suitable environment for protein folding and formation of disulphide bonds, assembly of multimeric proteins and post-translational modifications [69].
The lectin from Urtica doica (UDA) was produced in genetically-modified tobacco plants [70]. UDA contains a C-terminal end with vesicle localization labels. For this project, the C-terminal end of the protein was removed to achieve its cellular excretion and its purification. The authors reported that the proposed modifications did not interfere with the correct folding of the lectin, which maintains its antifungal activity. The analysis of the UDA sequence with the SignalP 4.0 program revealed that the lectin contains an ER signal peptide which was not altered in the construct, so the only difference in the synthesis between the native product and the recombinant one was the removal of the tag for vesicular retention [70]. A lectin from Robinia pseudoacacia was cloned in transgenic tobacco plants. The obtained lectin maintained the same size and biological activity as its native counterpart and its signal peptide was correctly cleaved. In addition, evidence was presented that suggests the formation of protein oligomers. The final yield was 1 mg of lectin per 50 g of fresh leaves [2].
The disadvantages of lectin production in plants include poor performance, difficulties associated with the generation process compared to the microorganisms, cost and required materials, facilities and the time required. It is also important to consider that when the glycosylation sequons are very close to the CRD, the conformation of the carbohydrates can be directly related to the recognition capacity of their ligands [35]. In these cases, it is suggested to use the same species of origin or some phylogenetically related plant.

6.4. Production of Recombinant Lectins in Animal Cells

The manipulation of animal cells is more expensive and complex than plant cells or microorganisms. However, they have the advantage of producing glycoproteins with a similar glycan profile to humans [59], so there is a great interest in the understanding and optimization of these systems. Insect lines have been noted for their relative simplicity, although their glycoproteins typically contain different glycans with respect to mammalian glycans (mainly mannose-rich N-glycans and mainly paucimannosidic N-glycans). In order to avoid these drawbacks, new strategies have emerged in recent years, such as the introduction of mammalian glycosylases regulated under the action of inducible promoters [71] and CRISPR-Cas technology to modify their glycosylation pathways [72].
Undoubtedly, the system most commonly used for production of recombinant proteins for therapeutic purposes is the Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cell line, because it represents a very well characterized model and also their glycosylation patterns are very similar to humans. This is particularly important when the lectin of interest has therapeutic purposes and the glycosylations are not only important to maintain its activity, but also interfere with the blood retention time and immune response. Within the reports of human lectins that have been produced in CHO cells and maintain their original properties, the mannan-binding lectin (MBL) stands out. MBL is a C-type animal lectin present in blood serum, which plays an important role in the innate immunity system [73]. This lectin is particularly interesting because it has the ability to neutralize the influenza virus. Both the human and recombinant versions exhibited neutralizing activity against the virus and both prevented viral propagation from infected primary cells to neighbouring cells. The final yield was 128.8 μg/mL of culture medium [73,74,75].
Animal systems can be used for the production of lectins of different origins, although it has been observed that sometimes the products exhibit important structural alterations. Considering the difficulties of their manipulation, these are not widely recommended for the production of lectins from other organisms. The production of a soybean agglutinin (BSA) in BS-C-1 monkey cells was reported to have a final yield of 1 mg protein/L of culture. The specificity of carbohydrate binding was not affected, although the product showed a decrease in its hemagglutinating capacity of at least four times with respect to the native lectin. In addition, it was observed that although the product was glycosylated, the carbohydrates were mainly oligomannosides, while these are normally Man9 (GlcNac) glycosylations in the native lectin [58].
It is known that glycosylation production in animal cells can be affected by bioprocess parameters, such as the cell line [76], cell density, media composition [77], nutrient levels and supplements [78,79], pH and transfection conditions [21,22]. The interactions between these parameters are complex and, therefore, attention should be paid to the development and optimization of this process [23]. In this sense, a recent study reported a new glycoengineering strategy, called GlycoDelete, to access glycoproteins with homogeneous N-glycans by shortening the Golgi N-glycosylation pathway in mammalian cells [80]. Table 3 shows a summary of the yields obtained for the production of recombinant lectins in different biological systems.

7. Summary of Considerations for Recombinant Lectin Production

The strategies for the production of recombinant lectins focus on their biological activity. These strategies must consider the modification of host organisms, aiming to approximate the original synthesis conditions, although sometimes modifications are also needed. An appropriate choice of such strategies is fundamental for the maintenance of the desirable characteristics of the product and for obtaining good yields of production. The most important aspects to consider for these purposes are:
(a) Considerations according to their synthesis
Knowing the site where lectin synthesis is carried out is perhaps the most important issue to be considered for successful heterologous expression. The lectins synthesized in the ER lumen differ to a great extent from those that are synthesized in cytoplasm. If there is no detailed information about its synthesis, we suggest using the SignalP 4.0 program to know if the lectin has a signal peptide to be translocated to ER during translation.
  • Lectins synthesized in cytoplasm. The lectins produced by free ribosomes in the cytoplasm, whether or not they have possible glycosylation sites, can be successfully expressed in E. coli with the consideration that it is necessary to introduce only the sequence of the mature protein. If the product obtained tends to form inclusion bodies, denaturation/renaturation strategies or the addition of excretion tags might be needed. When the lectin is normally synthesized in the cytoplasm, but contains possible glycosylation sites, and is desired to be expressed in yeast, it may be useful to mutate the sequons to avoid the addition of non-desirable glycosidic antennas. Proteins synthesized in cytoplasm can also be expressed in plants and animal cells, although these alternatives require more complex strategies, more investment of time and money. Furthermore, these generate lower yields than bacteria and yeasts. When using these strategies, it may be advisable not to add signal peptides that redirect the synthesis of the lectin in question to the ER and if added, it is recommended to mutate possible glycosylation sites to avoid the addition of non-desirable glycosidic antennas.
  • Lectins synthesized in ER. Those lectins that are commonly synthesized in ER but do not contain possible glycosylation sites can also be expressed in E. coli with the previously mentioned recommendations. However, it is important to consider that if an oxidizing or chaperoning environment is required for the correct folding, it may be convenient to use a modified strain of E. coli with non-reducing cytoplasm and chaperones. Yeasts may be a better alternative. It is important to note that in these cases, no drawbacks caused by non-native glycosylations will occur because the lectin will not contain any sequons. If the protein is normally synthesized in ER and if it contains sequons, we do not recommend using E. coli since the product will not contain glycosylations. Although it was shown that it is possible to obtain this type of lectins when using bacteria as producing organisms in some of the reports, all showed some type of structural alteration and/or partial loss of their functions. Therefore, it is preferable to use yeasts or higher organisms since they contain all the post-translational machinery, chaperones and the ER with an oxidizing environment. These lectins can also be expressed in plants and animal cells. In such cases, signalling peptides must be added, which can be recognized by the host organism and it is not necessary to mutate possible glycosylation sites.
(b) Considerations according to their origin
The lectins of archea and bacteria do not represent a problem in the choice of the generating organism as there is the option of changing to other systems, such as bacteria and yeasts. In the case of vegetable lectins, the production in microorganisms is always favourable due to the high yields and simplicity of manipulation. In case of not being a feasible alternative, it is possible to use well-established tobacco-like models, except when the glycosylation sequences are very close to the CRD. The conformation of the carbohydrates can influence the recognition capacity of their ligands, so in these cases, we suggest that the same species of origin or some phylogenetically-related plant should be used. Lectins of animal origin may also be produced in plants, although the antigenicity of carbohydrate antennas should be considered for pharmaceutical purposes. Figure 1 shows a scheme of the main considerations.

8. Final Remarks

Glycobiology comprises an extensive and scarcely explored world that promises to be very useful for future scientific development. In this sense, lectins play a fundamental role in the discovery of new drugs and materials that can contribute to studying and better understanding some biological processes that are influenced by the action of carbohydrates. However, the complexity of these proteins has greatly hindered their large-scale production. It is necessary to understand that in the particular case of lectins, the protein does not adapt to the system and thus, the system must be adapted to the protein. Understanding the needs of each lectin involves essentially trying to find the strategy that provides higher yields and guarantees the functionality of the product. This review aims to show the complex world of lectins by analysing their functions, characteristics and synthesis process, as well as showing some basic bioinformatic tools that can be used to obtain greater information. The information provides examples of some of the different strategies that have been developed to produce recombinant lectins in order to maintain their biological activity. These strategies focus on the modification of host organisms in order to approximate the original synthesis conditions, although it is also sometimes necessary to modify the polypeptide sequences. Being a heterogeneous group of proteins, it is not possible to declare the superiority of any of the systems explored for the heterologous production of lectins. However, the information is integrated into a complete analysis in this present paper, which can serve as a guide for choosing the most appropriate strategy according to the particular characteristics of each lectin. The recommendations here presented have been proposed taking simplicity as a priority, but also provide the option of more complex alternatives.

Acknowledgments

We thank Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACYT) for the fellowship for Dania Martínez-Alarcón and the financial support of CONACYT Ciencia Básica (CB-2014-01-241181) and PFCE-2017.

Author Contributions

Dania Martínez-Alarcón worked in the information compilation, analysis and manuscript writing; Alejandro Blanco-Labra and Teresa García-Gasca directed the manuscript elaboration, reviewed and edited each version.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The founding sponsors had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Sharon, N.; Lis, H. How proteins bind carbohydrates: Lessons from legume lectins. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50, 6586–6591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Tazaki, K.; Yoshida, K.; Shinohara, K.; Koshiba, T.; Yamamoto, N. Expression of cDNA for a bark lectin of Robinia in transgenic tobacco plants. FEBS Lett. 1995, 377, 54–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Sharon, N. Lectins: Carbohydrate-specific reagents and biological recognition molecules. J. Biol. Chem. 2007, 282, 2753–2764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Ferriz-Martinez, R.; García-García, K.; Torres-Arteaga, I.; Rodriguez-Mendez, A.J.; Guerrero-Carrillo, M.J.; Moreno-Celis, U.; Ángeles-Zaragoza, M.V.; Blanco-Labra, A.; Gallegos-Corona, M.A.; Robles-Álvarez, J.P.; et al. Tolerability assessment of a lectin fraction from Tepary bean seeds (Phaseolus acutifolius) orally administered to rats. Toxicol. Rep. 2015, 2, 63–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Branco, A.T.; Bernabé, R.B.; Dos Santos-Ferreira, B.; De Oliveira, M.V.; Garcia, A.B.; De Souza-Filho, G.A. Expression and purification of the recombinant SALT lectin from rice (Oryza sativa L.). Protein Expr. Purif. 2004, 33, 34–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Raemaekers, J.M.; De Muro, L.; Gatehouse, J.A.; Fordham-Skelton, A.P. Functional phytohemagglutinin (PHA) and Galanthus nivalis agglutinin (GNA) expressed in Pichia pastoris. Correct N-terminal processing and secretion of heterologous proteins expressed using the PHA-E signal peptide. Eur. J. Biochem. 1999, 265, 394–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Oliveira, C.; Teixeira, J.A.; Domingues, L. Recombinant production of plant lectins in microbial systems for biomedical application—The frutalin case study. Front. Plant Sci. 2014, 5, 390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  8. Singh, A.; Upadhyay, V.; Panda, A.K. Solubilization and refolding of inclusion body proteins. Insoluble Proteins Methods Protoc. 2014, 99, 283–291. [Google Scholar]
  9. Kawano, S.; Iyaguchi, D.; Okada, C.; Sasaki, Y.; Toyota, E. Expression, purification, and refolding of active recombinant human E-selectin lectin and EGF domains in E. coli. Protein J. 2013, 32, 386–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Singh, A.; Upadhyay, V.; Upadhyay, A.K.; Singh, S.M.; Panda, A.K. Protein recovery from inclusion bodies of E. coli using mild solubilization process. Microb. Cell Fact. 2015, 14, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Upadhyay, S.K.; Saurabh, S.; Rai, P.; Singh, R.; Chandrashekar, K.; Verma, P.C.; Singh, P.K.; Tuli, R. SUMO fusion facilitates expression and purification of garlic leaf lectin but modifies some of its properties. J. Biotechnol. 2010, 146, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Marblestone, J.G.; Edavettal, S.C.; Lim, Y.; Lim, P.; Zuo, X.; Butt, T.R. Comparison of SUMO fusion technology with traditional gene fusion systems: Enhanced expression and solubility with SUMO. Protein Sci. 2006, 15, 182–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Wildt, S.; Gerngross, T.U. The humanization of N-glycosylation pathways in yeast. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2005, 3, 119–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Demain, A.L.; Vaishnav, P. Production of recombinant proteins by microbes and higher organisms. Biotechnol. Adv. 2009, 27, 297–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Lannoo, N.; Vervecken, W.; Proost, P.; Rougé, P.; Van-Damme, E.J.M. Expression of the nucleocytoplasmic tobacco lectin in the yeast Pichia Pastoris. Protein Expr. Purif. 2007, 53, 275–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Díaz, C.L.; Logman, T.J.J.; Stam, H.C.; Kijne, J.W. Sugar-binding activity of pea lectin expressed in white clover hairy roots. Plant Physiol. 1995, 109, 1167–1177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Chrispeels, M.J.; Raikhel, N.V. Lectins, lectin genes, and their role in plant defense. Plant Cell. 1991, 3, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Sharon, N.; Lis, H. History of lectins: From hemagglutinins to biological recognition molecules. Glycobiology 2004, 14, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Varki, A.; Cummings, R.D.; Esko, J.D.; Freeze, H.H.; Stanley, P.; Bertozzi, C.R.; Hart, G.W.; Etzler, M.E. Microbial Lectins: Hemagglutinins, adhesins, and toxins. In Essentials of Glycobiology, 2nd ed.; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Cold Spring Harbor, NY, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  20. Franz, H.; Ziska, P.; Mohr, J. Lectins-definition and classification. Acta Histochem. 1982, 71, 19–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Goldstein, I.J.; Hughes, C.R.; Monsigny, M.; Osawa, T.; Sharon, N. What should be called a lectin? Nature 1980, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Laursen, B.S.; Sørensen, H.P.; Mortensen, K.K.; Sperling-Petersen, H.U. Initiation of protein synthesis in bacteria. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2005, 69, 101–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Cooper, G.M. The Endoplasmic Reticulum. In The Cell, 2nd ed.; Sinauer Associates: Sunderland, MA, USA, 2000; ISBN-10: 0-87893-106-6. [Google Scholar]
  24. Alberts, B.; Johnson, A.; Lewis, J.; Raff, M.; Roberts, K.; Walter, P. Intracellular compartments and protein sorting. In Molecular Biology of the Cell, 4th ed.; Garland Science: New York, NY, USA, 2002; pp. 723–730, ISBN-10: 0815332181. [Google Scholar]
  25. Cunningham, B.A.; Hemperly, J.J.; Hopp, T.P.; Edelman, G.M. Favin versus concanavalin A: Circularly permuted amino acid sequences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1979, 76, 3218–3222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Halder, S.; Surolia, A.; Mukhopadhyay, C. Impact of glycosylation on stability, structure and unfolding of soybean agglutinin (SBA): An insight from thermal perturbation molecular dynamics simulations. Glycoconj. J. 2015, 32, 371–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Nothaft, H.; Szymanski, C.M. Protein glycosylation in bacteria: Sweeter than ever. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2010, 11, 765–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Colangelo, J.; Licon, V.; Benen, J.; Visser, J.; Bergmann, C.; Orlando, R. Characterization of the glycosylation of recombinant endopolygalacturonase I from Aspergillus niger. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 1999, 13, 1448–1453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Dodd, R.B.; Drickamer, K. Lectin-like proteins in model organisms: Implications for evolution of carbohydrate-binding activity. Glycobiology 2001, 11, 71R–99R. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Lakhtin, V.; Lakhtin, M.; Alyoshkin, V. Lectins of living organisms. The overview. Anaerobe 2011, 17, 452–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Peumans, W.J.; Van-Damme, E.J.; Barre, A.R.P. Classification of plant lectins in families of structurally and evolutionary related proteins. In The Molecular Immunology of Complex Carbohydrates—2. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 2001; Volume 491, pp. 27–54. ISBN 978-1-4613-5469-7. [Google Scholar]
  32. Kilpatrick, D.C. Animal lectins: A historical introduction and overview. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2002, 1572, 187–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kumar, K.; Reddy, G.; Reddy, B.; Shekar, P.; Sumanthi, J.; Chandra, K.L.P. Biological role of lectins: A review. J. Orofac. Sci. 2012, 4, 20–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Goldstein, I.J.; Hayes, C.E. The Lectins: Carbohydrate-binding proteins of plants and animals. Adv. Carbohydr. Chem. Biochem. 1978, 35, 127–340. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  35. Weis, W.I.; Drickamer, K. Structural basis of lectin-carbohydrate recognition. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 1996, 65, 441–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Soga, K.; Abo, H.; Qin, S.Y.; Kyoutou, T.; Hiemori, K.; Tateno, H.; Matsumoto, N.; Hirabayashi, J.; Yamamoto, K. Mammalian Cell Surface Display as a Novel Method for Developing Engineered Lectins with Novel Characteristics. Biomolecules 2015, 5, 1540–1562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Lam, S.K.; Ng, T.B. Lectins: Production and practical applications. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2011, 89, 45–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  38. Naeem, A.; Haque, S.; Khan, R.H. Purification and characterization of a novel β-d-galactosides-specific lectin from Clitoria ternatea. Protein J. 2007, 26, 403–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Medeiros, D.S.; Medeiros, T.L.; Ribeiro, J.K.C.; Monteiro, N.K.V.; Migliolo, L.; Uchoa, A.F.; Vasconcelos, I.M.; Oliveira, A.S.; de Sales, M.P.; Santos, E.A. A lactose specific lectin from the sponge Cinachyrella apion: Purification, characterization, N-terminal sequences alignment and agglutinating activity on Leishmania promastigotes. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. B Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2010, 155, 211–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Hamid, R.; Masood, A.; Wani, I.H.; Rafiq, S. Lectins: Proteins with diverse applications. J. Appl. Pharm. Sci. 2013, 3, S93–S103. [Google Scholar]
  41. Torres-Arteaga, I.; Castro-Guillen, J.L.; Mendiola-Olaya, E.; García-Gasca, T.; Angeles-Zaragoza, M.V.; García-Santoyo, V.; Torres-Castillo, J.A.; Aguirre, C.; Phinney, B.; Blanco-Labra, A. Characterization of Two Non-Fetuin-Binding Lectins from Tepary Bean (Phaseolus acutifolius) Seeds with Differential Cytotoxicity on Colon Cancer Cells. J. Glycobiol. 2016, 5, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Felsted, R.L. Biological and biochemical properties of Phaseolus vulgaris isolectins. J. Biol. Chem. 1977, 252, 2961–2966. [Google Scholar]
  43. Miller, J.B.; Hsu, R.; Heinrikson, R.; Yachnin, S. Extensive homology between the subunits of the phytohemagglutinin mitogenic proteins derived from Phaseolus vulgaris. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1975, 72, 1388–1391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Pan, S.; Tang, J.; Gu, X. Isolation and characterization of a novel fucose-binding lectin from the gill of bighead carp (Aristichthys nobilis). Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 2010, 133, 154–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Imamichi, Y.; Yokoyama, Y. Purification, characterization and cDNA cloning of a novel lectin from the jellyfish Nemopilema nomurai. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. B Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2010, 156, 12–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Suzuki, T.; Amano, Y.; Fujita, M.; Kobayashi, Y.; Dohra, H.; Hirai, H.; Murata, T.; Usui, T.; Morita, T.; Kawagishi, H. Purification, characterization, and cDNA cloning of a lectin from the mushroom Pleurocybella porrigens. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2009, 73, 702–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Zhao, J.K.; Wang, H.X.; Ng, T.B. Purification and characterization of a novel lectin from the toxic wild mushroom Inocybe umbrinella. Toxicon 2009, 53, 360–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Ng, T.B.; Sharma, A.; Wong, J.H.; Lin, P. Purification and characterization of a lectin from Phaseolus vulgaris cv. (Anasazi Beans). J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2009, 2009, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  49. Xia, L.; Ng, T.B. An antifungal protein from flageolet beans. Peptides 2005, 26, 2397–2403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Kwan, S.; Bun, T. Novel galactonic acid-binding hexameric lectin from Hibiscus mutabilis seeds with antiproliferative and potent HIV-1 reverse transcriptase inhibitory activities. Acta Biochim. Pol. 2009, 56, 649–654. [Google Scholar]
  51. Kvennefors, E.C.E.; Leggat, W.; Hoegh-Guldberg, O.; Degnan, B.M.; Barnes, A.C. An ancient and variable mannose-binding lectin from the coral Acropora millepora binds both pathogens and symbionts. Dev. Comp. Immunol. 2008, 32, 1582–1592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Ashraf, G.M.; Rizvi, S.; Naqvi, S.; Suhail, N.; Bilal, N.; Hasan, S.; Tabish, M.; Banu, N. Purification, characterization, structural analysis and protein chemistry of a buffalo heart galectin-1. Amino Acids 2010, 39, 1321–1332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Gowda, N.M.; Goswami, U.; Khan, M.I. Purification and characterization of a T-antigen specific lectin from the coelomic fluid of a marine invertebrate, sea cucumber (Holothuria scabra). Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2008, 24, 450–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Adhya, M.; Singha, B.; Chatterjee, B.P. Purification and characterization of an N-acetylglucosamine specific lectin from marine bivalve Macoma birmanica. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2009, 27, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Leung, E.; Wong, J.; Ng, T.B. Concurrent purification of two defense proteins from French bean seeds: A defensin-like antifungal peptide and a hemagglutinin. J. Pept. Sci. 2008, 14, 349–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Patel, A. Isolation, characterization and production of a new recombinant lectin protein from leguminous plants. Biochem. Compd. 2014, 2, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Lara, A. Produccion de proteinas recombinantes en E. coli. Rev. Mex. Ing. Quim. 2011, 10, 209–223. [Google Scholar]
  58. Adar, R.; Streicher, H.; Rozenblatt, S.; Sharon, N. Synthesis of soybean agglutinin in bacterial and mammalian cells. Eur. J. Biochem. 1997, 249, 684–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Johannssen, T.; Lepenies, B. Glycan-Based Cell Targeting To Modulate Immune Responses. Trends Biotechnol. 2017, 35, 334–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Hatahet, F.; Boyd, D.; Beckwith, J. Disulfide bond formation in prokaryotes: History, diversity and design. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Proteins Proteom. 2014, 1844, 1402–1414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Sørensen, H.P.; Mortensen, K.K. Advanced genetic strategies for recombinant protein expression in E. coli. J. Biotechnol. 2005, 115, 113–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Romanos, M.; Scorer, C.; Clare, J.J. Foreign gene expression in yeast: A review. Yeast 1992, 8, 423–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Chrispeels, A.S.; Maarten, J. Identification of vacuolar sorting information in phytohemagglutinin, an unprocessed vacuolar protein. J. Exp. Bot. 1993, 44, 23–27. [Google Scholar]
  64. Chao, Q.; Etzler, M.E. Incorrect targeting of plant vacuolar lectins in yeast. J. Biol. Chem. 1994, 269, 20866–20871. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  65. Barnes, D.A.; Thorner, J. Genetic manipulation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae by use of the LYS2 gene. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1986, 6, 2828–2838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Cereghino, J.; Cregg, J.M. Heterologous protein expression in the methylotrophic yeast Pichia pastoris. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 2000, 24, 45–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Oliveira, C.; Felix, W.; Moreira, R.A.; Teixeira, J.A.; Domingues, L. Expression of frutalin, an α-d-galactose-binding jacalin-related lectin, in the yeast Pichia pastoris. Protein Expr. Purif. 2008, 60, 188–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Giddings, G.; Allison, G.; Brooks, D.; Carter, A. Transgenic plants as factories for biopharmaceuticals. Nat. Biotechnol. 2000, 18, 1151–1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Borisjuk, N.V.; Borisjuk, L.G.; Logendra, S.; Petersen, F.; Gleba, Y.; Raskin, I. Production of recombinant proteins in plant root exudates. Nat. Biotechnol. 1999, 17, 466–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Does, M.P.; Houterman, P.M.; Dekker, H.L.; Cornelissen, B.J. Processing, targeting, and antifungal activity of stinging nettle agglutinin in transgenic tobacco. Plant Physiol. 1999, 120, 421–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Aumiller, J.J.; Mabashi-Asazuma, H.; Hillar, A.; Shi, X.; Jarvis, D.L. A new glycoengineered insect cell line with an inducibly mammalianized protein N-glycosylation pathway. Glycobiology 2012, 22, 417–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Mabashi-Asazuma, H.; Kuo, C.W.; Khoo, K.H.; Jarvis, D.L. Modifying an insect cell N-glycan processing pathway using CRISPR-Cas Technology. ACS Chem. Biol. 2015, 10, 2199–2208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Kase, T.; Suzuki, Y.; Kawai, T.; Sakamoto, T.; Ohtani, K.; Eda, S.; Maeda, A.; Okuno, Y.; Kurimura, T.; Wakamiya, N. Human mannan-binding lectin inhibits the infection of influenza A virus. Inmmunology 1999, 97, 385–392. [Google Scholar]
  74. Ohtani, K.; Suzuki, Y.; Eda, S.; Kawai, T.; Kase, T.; Keshi, H.; Sakai, Y.; Yamamoto, S.; Sakamoto, T.; Wakamiya, N. High-level and effective production of human mannan-binding lectin (MBL) in Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells. J. Immunol. Methods 1999, 222, 135–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Cho, M.; Cummings, R.D. Galectin-1, a β-galactoside-binding lectin in Chinese hamster ovary cells. I. Physical and chemical characterization. J. Biol. Chem. 1995, 270, 5198–5206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Croset, A.; Delafosse, L.; Gaudry, J.P.; Arod, C.; Glez, L.; Losberger, C.; Begue, D.; Krstanovic, A.; Robert, F.; Vilbois, F.; et al. Differences in the glycosylation of recombinant proteins expressed in HEK and CHO cells. J. Biotechnol. 2012, 161, 336–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Cervera, L.; Gutiérrez-Granados, S.; Martínez, M.; Blanco, J.; Gòdia, F.; Segura, M.M. Generation of HIV-1 Gag VLPs by transient transfection of HEK 293 suspension cell cultures using an optimized animal-derived component free medium. J. Biotechnol. 2013, 166, 152–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Blondeel, E.J.M.; Braasch, K.; McGill, T.; Chang, D.; Engel, C.; Spearman, M.; Butler, M.; Aucoin, M.G. Tuning a MAb glycan profile in cell culture: Supplementing N-acetylglucosamine to favour G0 glycans without compromising productivity and cell growth. J. Biotechnol. 2015, 214, 105–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. St. Amand, M.M.; Radhakrishnan, D.; Robinson, A.S.; Ogunnaike, B.A. Identification of manipulated variables for a glycosylation control strategy. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2014, 111, 1957–1970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Meuris, L.; Santens, F.; Elson, G.; Festjens, N.; Boone, M.; Dos Santos, A.; Devos, S.; Rousseau, F.; Plets, E.; Houthuys, E.; et al. GlycoDelete engineering of mammalian cells simplifies N-glycosylation of recombinant proteins. Nat. Biotechnol. 2014, 32, 485–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Oliveira, C.; Costa, S.; Teixeira, J.A.; Domingues, L. cDNA Cloning and Functional Expression of the α-d-Galactose-Binding Lectin Frutalin in E. coli. Mol. Biotechnol. 2009, 43, 212–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  82. Baumgartner, P.; Raemaekers, R.J.M.; Durieux, A.; Gatehouse, A.; Davies, H.; Taylor, M. Large-scale production, purification, and characterisation of recombinant Phaseolus vulgaris phytohemagglutinin E-form expressed in the methylotrophic yeast Pichia pastoris. Protein Expr. Purif. 2002, 26, 394–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Abd-Wahid, M.A.; Megat-Mohd, M.J.; Goto, M.; Sugiura, N.; Othman, N.; Zakaria, Z.; Ahmad-Mohammed, T.; Jusoh, A.; Hara, H. Recombinant protein expression of Moringa oleifera lectin in methylotrophic yeast as active coagulant for sustainable high turbid water treatment. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2017, 81, 1642–1649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Zhang, W.; Van Eijk, M.; Guo, H.; van Dijk, A.; Bleijerveld, O.B.; Verheije, M.H.; Wang, G.; Haagsman, H.P.; Veldhuizen, E.J. Expression and characterization of recombinant chicken mannose binding lectin. Immunobiology 2017, 222, 518–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ijms 19 00616 g001 550
Figure 1. Diagram of strategies for the successful production of recombinant lectins according to their characteristics and origin.
Figure 1. Diagram of strategies for the successful production of recombinant lectins according to their characteristics and origin.
Ijms 19 00616 g001
Table
Table 1. The overall view of lectins from different organisms.
Table 1. The overall view of lectins from different organisms.
ParameterOrganismLectin FamilyReference
Cell localizationAllExtracellular lectins, intracellular endoplasmic reticulum (ER) lectins, Golgi lectins, cytoplasmic lectins, membrane-bound lectins.[30]
Structural and evolutionary sequence similaritiesAllBeta prism lectins (B-type), calcium dependent lectins (C-type), lectins with Ficolins-Fibrinogen/collagen domain (F-type), garlic and snow drop lectins (G-type), hyaluronan bonding proteins or hyal-adherins (H-type), immunoglobulin superfamily lectins (I-type), jocob and related lectins (J-type), legume seed lectins (L-type), alpha mannosidase related lectins (M-type), nucleotide phosphohydrolases lectins (N-type), ricin lectins (R-type), Tachypleus tridentatus (T-type), wheat germ agglutinin (W type), Xenopus egg lectins (X type)[33]
Taxonomic originAllPlants lectins, animal lectins, microbial lectins.[30]
Carbohydrate-specificitiesPlant and animalsd-mannose (d-glucose)-binding lectins, 2-acetamido-2-deoxy-glucose-binding lectins, 2-acetamido-2-deoxy-galactose-binding lectins, d-galactose-binding lectins, l-fucose-binding lectins, other lectins.[34]
AllGlucose/mannose-binding lectins, galactose and N-acetyl-d-galactosamine-binding lectins, l-fucose-binding lectins, sialic acids-binding lectins.[33]
FunctionMicrobialHemagglutinins, adhesins, and toxins.[30]
AnimalGalectins, selectins, collectins and pentraxins.[32]
StructureAnimalsC-type, galectins, P-type (M-6-PR), I-type, pentraxins, heparyn binding type, F-type, calnexin, M-type, L-type, R-type, F-box, ficolin, chitinase-like.[32]
PlantsAmaranthins, nictaba related proteins, heveins (chitin binding lectins), jackalins, legume lectins, Galanthus nivalis agglutinin and GNA-related lectins, monocot mannose binding lectins, and plant lectins with Ricin-B domain.[31]
Table
Table 2. Yields of different lectins obtained by traditional purification techniques.
Table 2. Yields of different lectins obtained by traditional purification techniques.
Natural SourcePurificationLectin YieldReferences
Acropora millepora (coral), plasma fluid.Mannose affinity chromatography.0.7 mg/100 mL of plasma[51]
Aristichthys nobilis (bighead carp), gills.Chromatography on diethylaminoethanol (DEAE)-Sepharose, Sephacryl S-200 and superdex-200.9.4 mg/100 g[44]
Pleurocybella porrigens.Chromatography on Sepharose 4B, BioAssist Q.2.6 mg/100 g[46]
Bubalus bubalis (buffalo), heart tissue.Ammonium sulphate precipitation and chromatography on Sephadex G50.0.97 mg/100 g[52]
Hibiscus mutabilis.Ion exchange chromatography on SP-Sepharose and gel filtration in Superdex 75 and Superdex 200.4.04 mg/100 g[50]
Inocybe umbrinella (mushroom).Ion exchange chromatography on DEAE cellulose and carboxymethylcellulose, and gel filtration on Superdex 75.15.3 mg/100 g[47]
Holothuria scabra (sea cucumber), coelomic fluid.Ultrafiltration and chromatography on Phenyl-Sepharose.1.6 mg/100 g[53]
Macoma birmanica (marine bivalve), foot muscles.Ammonium sulphate precipitation and chromatography on N-acetylglucosamine Sepharose 4B.4.5 mg/100 g[54]
Nemopilema nomurai (jellyfish).Chromatography on SP-Sepharose and BSM-Toyopearl.0.35 mg/100 g[45]
Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean), cultivar french bean.Chromatography on SP-Sepharose, Affi-gel blue, Q-Sepharose, and Superdex 200.4.8 mg/100 g[55]
Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean), cultivar dark red kidney beanChromatography on DEAE-cellulose and Affi-gel blue gel.107 mg/100 g[49]
Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean) cultivar Anasazi beanAffi-gel blue gel, Mono S and chromatography on Superdex 200.13 mg/100 g[48]
Table
Table 3. Yields of different lectins obtained by recombinant techniques.
Table 3. Yields of different lectins obtained by recombinant techniques.
LectinNatural SourceProducing OrganismProduction YieldReferences
SALTOryza sativa LE. coli14.6 mg/L[5]
ASALAllium sativumE. coli5 mg/L[11]
Artocarpus incisa lectinArtocampus incisaE. coli16 mg/L[81]
NICTABANicotiana tabacumP. pastoris6 mg/L[15]
PHA-EPhaseolus vulgarisP. pastoris0.4–1 mg/L[6]
GNAGalanthus nivalisP. pastoris1–2 mg/L[6]
SBAGlycine maxBS-C-1 cells1 mg/L[58]
PHAPhaseolus vulgarisP. pastoris100 mg/L[82]
GNAGalantus nivalisP. pastoris80 mg/L[82]
UDAUrtica doicaNicotiana tabacumNo reported[70]
R. pseudoacacia lectinRobinia pseudoacaciaNicotiana tabacum2 mg/100 g of dry leaves[2]
MLBHomo sapiensChinese hamster ovary cells128 µg/mL[73]
MoLMoringa oleiferaP. pastoris520 mg/L[83]
MBLGallus GallusHeLa R19 Cells1.5–2 mg/L[84]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Martínez-Alarcón, D.; Blanco-Labra, A.; García-Gasca, T. Expression of Lectins in Heterologous Systems. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 616. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19020616

AMA Style

Martínez-Alarcón D, Blanco-Labra A, García-Gasca T. Expression of Lectins in Heterologous Systems. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2018; 19(2):616. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19020616

Chicago/Turabian Style

Martínez-Alarcón, Dania, Alejandro Blanco-Labra, and Teresa García-Gasca. 2018. "Expression of Lectins in Heterologous Systems" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 19, no. 2: 616. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19020616

APA Style

Martínez-Alarcón, D., Blanco-Labra, A., & García-Gasca, T. (2018). Expression of Lectins in Heterologous Systems. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 19(2), 616. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19020616

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop