Enzymatic breakdown of lignocellulosic biomass: the role of glycosyl hydrolases and lytic polysaccharide monooxygenases

References

• Mtui G, Nakamura Y. Bioconversion of lignocellulosic waste from selected dumping sites in Dares Salaam, Tanzania. Biodegradation. 2005;16(6):493–499.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh S, Moholkar VS, Goyal A. Isolation, identification, and characterization of a cellulolytic Bacillus amyloliquefaciens Strain SS3S from Rhinocerus dung. ISRN Microbiol. 2013 [ cited 2017 Apr 3]; Article ID 728134. DOI:10.1155/2013/728134.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Demain A, Newcomb M, Wu JHD. Cellulase, Clostridia and ethanol. Microbiol Mol Biol R. 2005;69(1):124–154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynd LR, Jin H, Michels JG, et al. Bioenergy: background, potential and policy. A policy briefing prepared for the Centre for Strategic and International Studies. Washington (DC): Centre for Strategic and International Studies; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Kumar A, Gautam A, Dutt D. Biotechnological transformation of lignocellulosic biomass in to industrial products: an overview. Adv Biosci Biotechnol. 2016;7:149–168.
   Google Scholar
• Kumar P, Barrett DM, Delwiche MJ, et al. Methods for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass for efficient hydrolysis and biofuel production. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2009;48(8):3713–3729.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang H, Squina F, Segato F, et al. High temperature enzymatic breakdown of cellulose. Appl Environ Microb. 2011;77(15):5199–5206.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Himmel ME, Ding SY, Johnson DY, et al. Biomass recalcitrance: engineering plants and enzymes for biofuel production. Science. 2007;315(5813):804–807.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfenden R, Lu X, Young G. Spontaneous hydrolysis of glycosides. J Am Chem Soc. 1998;120:6814–6815.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wahlstrom R, Rovio S, Suurnakki A. Partial enzymatic hydrolysis of microcrystalline cellulose ionic liquids by Trichderma reesei endoglucanases. RSC Adv. 2012;2:4472–4480.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golan AE. Cellulase: types and action, mechanism, and uses. New York (NY): Nova Science Publishers; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Wahlstrom R. Enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose in aqueous ionic liquids [dissertation]. Espoo: Aalto University School of Chemical Technology; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Lynd LR, Weimer PJ, van Zyl WH, et al. Microbial cellulose utilization: fundamentals and biotechnology. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2002;66:506–577.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elwyn TR, Ralph GHS, Hillel SL. The biological degradation of soluble cellulose derivatives and its relationship to the mechanism of cellulose hydrolysis. J Bacteriol. 1950;59:485–497.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang YH, Lynd LR. Toward an aggregated understanding of enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose: noncomplexed cellulase systems. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2004;88:797–824.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medie FM, Davies GJ, Drancourt M. Genome analyses highlight the different biological roles of cellulases. Nat Microbiol. 2012;10:227–234.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shewale JG. Glucosidases: its role in cellulase synthesis and hydrolysis of cellulose. Int J Biochem. 1982;14(16):435–443.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Woodward J, Wiseman A. Fungal and other β-D-glucosidases: their properties and applications. Enz Microbiol Technol. 1983;4(2):73–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saini JK, Saini R, Tewari L. Lignocellulosic agriculture wastes as biomass feedstocks for second-generation bioethanol productions concepts and recent developments. 3 Biotech. 2014;5(4):337–353.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Xiros C, Topakas E, Christakopoulos P. Hydrolysis and fermentation for cellulosic ethanol production. In: Lund DE, Byrne J, Berndes G, Vasalos LA, editors. Advances in bioenergy: the sustainability challenge. New York (NY): Wiley; 2016. p. 11–31.
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert HJ, Hazlewood GP. Bacterial cellulases and xylanases. J Gen Microbiol. 1993;139:187–194.
   Google Scholar
• Payne CM, Bomble YJ, Taylor CB, et al. Multiple functions of aromatic-carbohydrate interactions in a processive cellulase examined with molecular simulation. J Biol Chem. 2011;286(47):41028–41035.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor CB, Payne CM, Himmel ME. Binding site dynamics and aromatic–carbohydrate interactions in processive and non-processive family 7 glycoside hydrolases. J Biol Chem. 2014;117:4924–4933.
   Google Scholar
• Beeson WT, Vu VV, Span EA, et al. Cellulose degradation by polysaccharide monooxygenases. Annu Rev Biochem. 2015;84:923–946.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehninger A, Nelson DL, Cox M. Principles of biochemistry. 3rd ed. New York (NY): Worth Publishers; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Henrissat BA. Classification of glycosyl hydrolases based on amino acid sequence similarities. Biochem J. 1991;280(Pt2):309–316.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henrissat B, Bairoch A. New families in the classification of glycosyl hydrolases based on amino acid sequence similarities. Biochem J. 1993;293(Pt2):781–788.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cantarel BL, Coutinho PM, Rancurei C, et al. The carbohydrate-active enzymes database (CAZy): an expert resource for glycogenomics. Nucleic Acids Res. 2009;37:D233–238.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lombard V, Golaconda RH, Drula E, et al. The carbohydrate-active enzyme database (CAZy) in 2013. Nucleic Acid Res. 2014;42:D490–D495.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sathya A, Khan M. Diversity of glycosyl hydrolase enzymes from metagenome and their application in food industry. J Food Sci. 2014;79(11):2149–2156.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bornscheuer U, Buchholz K, Seibel J. Enzymatic degradation of (lingo)cellulose. J Gesellschaft Deutscher Chemiker. 2014;53(41):10876–10893.
   Google Scholar
• Boraston AB, Bolan DN, Gilbert HJ, et al. Carbohydrate-binding odules: fine-tuning polysaccharide recognition. Biochem J. 2004;382(3):769–781.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLean BW, Bray MR, Boraston AB, et al. Analysis of binding of the family 2a carbohydrate-binding module from Cellulomonas fimi xylanase 10A to cellulose: specificity and identification of functionally important amino acid residues. Protein Eng. 2000;13:801–809.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Boraston AB, Revett TJ, Boraston CM, et al. Structural and thermodynamic dissection of specific mannan recognition by a carbohydrate binding module, TmCBM27. Structure. 2003;11:665–675.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Notenboom V, Boraston AB, Chiu P, et al. Recognition of cello-oligosaccharides by a family 17 carbohydrate-binding module: an X-ray crystallographic, thermodynamic and mutagenic study. J Mol Biol. 2001;314:797–806.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creagh AL, Ong E, Jervis E, et al. Binding of the cellulose-binding domain of exoglucanase Cex from Cellulomonas fimi to insoluble microcrystalline cellulose is entropically driven. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1996;93:12229–12234.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Najmudin BA, Pinheiro JA, Prates HJ, et al. Putting an N-terminal end to the Clostridium thermocellum xylanase Xyn10B story: crystal structure of the CBM22–1–GH10 modules complexed with xylohexaose. J Struct Biol. 2010;72:353–362.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inoue H, Kishishita S, Kumagai A, et al. Contribution of a family 1 carbohydrate-binding module in a thermostable glycoside hydrolase 10 xylanase from Talaromyces cellulolyticus toward synergistic enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulose. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2015 [ cited 2017 May 3];8:77. DOI:10.1186/s130–015–0259–2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jager G, Girfoglio M, Dollo F, et al. How recombinant swollenin from Kluyveromyces lactis affects cellulosic substrates and accelerates their hydrolysis. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2011 [ cited 2017 May 3];4:33. DOI:10.1186/1754–6834–433.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arantes V, Saddler JN. Access to cellulose limits the efficiency of enzymatic hydrolysis: the role of amorphogenesis. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2010 [ cited 2017 May 3];3:4. DOI:10.1186/1754–6834–3–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ting CL, Makarov DE, Wang ZG. A kinetic model for the enzymatic action of cellulase. J Phys Chem. 2009;13(14):4970–4977.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Payne CM, Resch MG, Chen L, et al. Glycosylated likers in multi modular ligno cellulose-degrading enzymes dynamically bind to cellulose. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:14646–14651.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayer EA, Kenig R, Lamed RJ. Adherence of Clostridium thermocellum to cellulose. Bacteriology. 1983;156:818–827.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blumer-Schuette SE, Brown SD, Sander KB, et al. Thermophilic lignocellulose deconstruction. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2014;38:393–448.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou F, Olman V, Xu Y. Large-scale analyses of glycosylation in cellulases. Genomics Proteomics Bioinformatics. 2009;7(4):194–199.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fontes CM, Gilbert HJ. Cellulosomes: highly efficient nanomaches designed to deconstruct plant cell wall complex carbohydrates. Annu Rev Biochem. 2010;79:665–681.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayer EA, Belaich J, Shoham Y, et al. The cellulosomes: multienzyme machines for degradation of plant cell wall Polysaccharides. Annu Rev Microbiol. 2004;58:521–554.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noach I, Levy-Assaraf M, Lamed R, et al. Modular arrangement of a cellulosomal scaffoldin subunit revealed from the crystal structure of a cohesin dyad. J Mol Biol. 2010;399:294–305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamberg Y, Ruimy-Isreali V, Dassa B, et al. Elaborate cellulosome architecture of Acetivibrio cellulolyticus revealed by selective screening of cohesion-dockerin interactions. Peer J. 2014 [ cited 2017 May 3];2:e636. DOI:10.7717/peerj.636.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gefen G, Anbar M, Morag E, et al. Enhanced cellulose degradation by targeted integration of a cohesin-fused β-glucosidase into the Clostridium thermocellum cellulosome. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012;109:10298–10303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mori Y, Ozasa S, Kitaoka M, et al. Aligning an endoglucanase Cel5A from Thermobifida fusca on a DNA scaffold: potent design of an artificial cellulosome. Chem Commun. 2013;49:6971–6973.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Himmel ME, Karplus PA, Sakon J, et al. Polysaccharide hydrolase folds diversity of structure and convergence of function. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 1997;63–65:315–325.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang B, Dai Z, Ding SY, et al. Enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulosic biomass. Biofuels. 2011;2(4):421–450.
   Google Scholar
• Ganner T, Bubner P, Eibinger M, et al. Dissecting and reconstructing synergism in situ visualization of cooperativity among cellulases. J Biol Chem. 2012;287:43215–43222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bubner P, Plank H, Nidetzky B. Visualizing cellulase activity. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2013;110:1529–1549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sturcova A, His I, Apperley DC, et al. Structural details of crystalline cellulose from higher plants. Biomacromolecules. 2004;5:1333–1339.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habibi Y, Lucia LA, Rojas OJ. Cellulose nanocrystals: chemistry, self-assembly, and applications. Chem Rev. 2010;110(6):3479–3500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox JM, Jess P, Jambusaria RB, et al. A single-molecule analysis reveals morphological targets for cellulase synergy. Nat Chem Biol. 2013;9:356–361.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luterbacher JS, Walker LP, Moran-Mirabal JM. Observing and modeling BMCC degradation by commercial cellulase cocktails with fluorescently labeled Trichoderma reesei Cel7A through confocal microscopy. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2013;110:108–117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luterbacher JS, Parlange JY, Walker LP. A pore-hindered diffusion and reaction model can help explain the importance of pore size distribution in enzymatic hydrolysis of biomass. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2013;110:127–136.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coughlan MP, Ljungdahl LG. Comparative biochemistry of fungal and bacterial cellulolytic enzyme system. In: Aubert, JP, Beguin P, Millet J, editors. FEMS Symposium: Biochemistry and Genetics of Cellulose Degradation. London: Academic Press; 1988. p. 11–30.
   Google Scholar
• Sun Y, Cheng J. Hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials for ethanol production: a review. Biores Technol. 2002;83:1–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elkins JG, Ramen B, Keller M. Engineered microbial systems for enhanced conversion of lignocellulosic biomass. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2010;21(5):657–662.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayer EA, Chanzy H, Lamed R, et al. Cellulose, cellulases and cellulosomes. Current Opin Struct Biol. 1998;8(5):548–557.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chanzy H, Henrissat B, Vuong R. Colloidal gold labeling of 1,4-β-D-glucan cellobiohydrolase adsorbed on cellulose substrates. FEBS Lett. 1984;172:193–197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvey AJ, Hrmova M, De Gori R, et al. Comparative modeling of the three-dimensional structures of family 3 glycoside hydrolases. Proteins. 2000;41(2):257–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiao WP, Clarkson WW. Acid solubilization of lignin and bioconversion of treated newsprint to methane. Biodegradation. 1997;8:61–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamelinck CN, van Hooijdonk G, Faaij APC. Ethanol from lignocellulosic biomass: techno-economic performance in short-, middle- and long-term. Biomass Bioenerg. 2005;28:384–410.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pan X, Xie D, Kang KY, et al. Effect of organosolv ethanol pretreatment variables on physical characteristics of hybrid poplar substrates. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 2007;137:367–377.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee JW, Gwak KS, Park JY, et al. Biological pretreatment of softwood Pinus densiflora by three white rot fungi. J Microbiol. 2007;45:485–491.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansfield SD, Mooney C, Saddler JN. Substrate and enzyme characteristics that limit cellulose hydrolysis. Biotechnol Progr. 1999;15:804–816.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng G, Varanasi P, Li CL, et al. Transition of cellulose crystalline structure and surface morphology of biomass as a function of ionic liquid pretreatment and its relation to enzymatic hydrolysis. Biomacromolecules. 2011;12:933–941.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhat MK. Cellulases and related enzymes in biotechnology. Biotechnol Adv. 2000;18:355–383.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang MJ, Su RX, Qi W, et al. Enhanced enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulose by optimizing enzyme complexes. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 2010;160:1407–1414.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hrmova A, MacGregor EA, Biely P, et al. Substrate binding and catalytic mechanism of a barley β-D-glucosidase/(1,4) –β–D–glucan exohydrolase. J Biol Chem. 1998;273:11134–11143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alvira P, Tomas-Pejo E, Ballesteros M, et al. Pretreatment technologies for an efficient bioethanol production process based on enzymatic hydrolysis: a review. Bioresour Technol. 2010;101(13):4851–4861.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chitlaru E, Roseman S. Molecular cloning and characterization of a novel beta-N-acetylglucosaminidase from Vibrio furnissii. J Biol Chem. 1998;271(52):33433–33439.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fincher G, Mark B, Brumer H. Glycoside hydrolase family 3 [Internet]. In: Henrissat B, editor. CAZypedia. [ cited 2017 May 4]. Available from: http://www.cazypedia.org/
   Google Scholar
• Davies GJ, Wison KS, Henrissat B. Nomenclature for sugar-binding subsites in glycosyl hydrolases. Biochem J. 1997;321(Pt2):557–559.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pozzo T, Pasten JL, Karlsson EN, et al. Structural and functional analyses of beta-glucosidase 3B from Thermotoga neapolitana: a thermostable three-domain representative of glycoside hydrolase 3. J Mol Biol. 2010;397(3):724–739.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paal K, Ito M, Withers SG. Paenibacillus sp. Ts12 glucosylceramidase: kinetic studies of a novel sub-family of family glycosidases and identification of the catalytic residues. Biochem J. 2004;378:141–149.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bause E, Legler G. Isolation and amino acid sequence of a hexadocapeptide from the active site of beta-glucosidaseA3 from Aspergilllus wentii. Hoppe-Seyler's Z Physiol Chem. 1974;355(4):438–442.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chir J, Withers S, Wan CF, et al. Identification of the two essential groups in the family 3 beta-glucosidase from Flavobacterium meningosepticum by labeling and tandem mass spectrometric analysis. Biochem J. 2002;365(Pt 3):857–863.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dan S, Marton I, Dekel M, et al. Cloning, expression, characterization and nucleophile identification of family 3 Aspergillus niger beta-glucosidase. J Biol Chem. 2000;275(7):4973–4980.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thongpoo P, Mckee LS, Araujo AC, et al. Identification of the acid/base catalyst of a glycoside hydrolase family 3 (GH3) beta-glucosidase from Aspergillus niger ASKU28. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2013;1830(3):2739–2749.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee RC, Hrmova M, Burton RA, et al. Bifunctional family 3 glycoside hydrolases from barley with alpha-L-arabinofuranosidase and beta-D-xylosidase activity, characterization, primary structures and CooH-terminal processing. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(7):5377–5387.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bacik JP, Whitworth GE, Stubbs KA, et al. Active site plasticity within the glycoside hydrolase NagZ underlies a dynamic mechanism of substrate distortion. Chem Biol. 2012;19:1471–1482.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stubbs KA, Balcewich M, Mark BL, et al. Small molecule inhibitors of a glycoside hydrolase attenuate inducible Amp C-mediated beta-lactam resistance. J Biol Chem. 2007;284(29):21382–21391.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vocadlo DJ, Withers SG. Detailed comparative analysis of the catalytic mechanisms of beta-N-acetyglucosaminidases from families 3 and 20 of glycoside hydrolase. Biochemistry. 2005;44(38):12809–12818.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Litzinger S, Duckworth A, Nitzsche K, et al. Muropeptide rescue in Bacillus subtilis involves sequential hydrolysis by beta-N-acetylglucosaminidase and N-acetyl-muranyl-L-alanine amidase. J Bacteriol. 2010;192(12):3132–3143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aspeborg H, Coutinho PM, Wang Y, et al. Evolution, substrate specificity and subfamily classification of glycoside hydrolase family 5 (GH5). BMC Evol Biol. 2012 [ cited 2017 May 3]. DOI:10.1186/1471–2148–12–186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson DB, Urbanowicz B. Glycoside hydrolase family 9. In: Wilson DB, editor. CAZypedia. [ cited 2017 May 4]. Available from: http://www.cazypedia.org/
   Google Scholar
• Py B, Bortoli-German I, Haiech J, et al. Cellulase EGZ of Erwinia chrysanthemi, structural organization and importance of His-98 abd Glu-133 residues for catalysis. Protein Eng. 1991;4:325–333.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sakon J, Irwin D, Wilson DB, et al. Structure and mechanism of endo/exocellulase E4 from Thermomonospora fusca. Nat Struct Biol. 1997;44:810–818.
   Google Scholar
• Sathya TA, Khan M. Diversity of glycosyl hydrolase enzymes from metagenome and their applications in food industry. J Food Sci. 2014;79(11):R2149–R2156.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Urbanowicz BR, Catala C, Irwinm D, et al. A tomato endo-beta-1,4,glucanase, SICel9C1, represents a distinct subclass with a new family of carbohydrate-binding modules (CBM49). J Biol Chem. 2007;282(16):12066–12074.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou W, Irwin DC, Escovar-Kousen J, et al. Kinetic studies of Thermofida fusca Cel9A active site mutant enzymes. Biochemistry. 2004;43(30):9655–9663.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Y, Irwin DC, Wilson DB. Processivity, substrate binding and mechanism of cellulose hydrolysis by Thermobifida fusca Cel9A. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007;73(10):3165–3172.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guerin DM, Lascombe MB, Costabel M, et al. Atomic (0.94A) resolution structure of an inverting glycosidase in complex with substrate. J Mol Biol. 2002;316(5):1061–1069.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klemm D, Heublein B, Fink HP, et al. Cellulose: fascinating biopolymer and sustainable raw material. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2005;44:3358–3393.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ding S, Himmel ME. The maize primary cell wall microfibril: a new model derived from direct visualization. J Agric Food Chem. 2006;54:597–606.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaaje-Kolstad G, Westereng B, Horn SJ, et al. An oxidative enzyme boosting the enzymatic conversion of recalcitrant polysaccharides. Science. 2010;330:219–222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langston JA, Shaghasi T, Abbate E, et al. Oxidoreductive cellulose depolymerization by the enzymes cellobiose dehydrogenase and glycoside hydrolase 61. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2011;77:7007–7015.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forsberg Z, Mackenzie AK, Sorlie M, et al. Structural and functional characterization of a conserved pair of bacterial cellulose–oxidizing lytic polysaccharidemonooxygenases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:8446–8451.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horn SJ, Vaaje-Kolstad G, Westereng B, et al. Novel enzymes for the degradation of cellulose. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2012;5:45–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris PV, Welner D, McFarland KC, et al. Stimulation of lignocellulosic biomass hydrolysis by proteins of glycoside hydrolase family 61: structure and function of a large, enigmatic family. Biochemistry. 2010;49:3305–3316.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips CM, Beeson WT, Cate JH, et al. Cellobiose dehydrogenase and a copper-dependent polysaccharide monooxygenase potentiate cellulose degradation by Neurospora crassa. ACS Chem Biol. 2011;6:1399–1406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinlan RJ, Sweeney MD, Lo Leggio L, et al. Insights into the oxidative degradation of cellulose by a copper metalloenzyme that exploits biomass components. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:15079–15084.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westereng B, Ishida T, Vaaje-Kolstad G, et al. The putative endoglucanase PcGH61D from Phanerochaete chrysosporium is ametal-dependent oxidative enzyme that cleaves cellulose. PLoS One. 2012 [ cited 2017 May 3];6(11):e27807. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0027807.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beeson WT, Phillips CM, Cate JHD, et al. Oxidative cleavage of cellulose by fungal copper-dependent polysaccharide monooxygenases. J Biol Chem. 2012;134:890–892.
   Google Scholar
• Li X, Beeson WT, Phillips CM et al. Structural basis for substrate targeting and catalysis by fungal polysaccharide monooxygenases. Structure. 2012;20:1051–1061.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemsworth GR, Davies GJ, Walton PH. Recent insights into copper-containing lytic polysaccharide mono-oxygenases. Curr Opin Struc Biol. 2013;23:660–668.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isaksen T, Westereng B, Aachmann FL, et al. A C4-oxidizing lytic polysaccharide monooxygenase cleaving both cellulose and cello-oligosaccharides. J Biol Chem. 2014;289:2632–2642.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vu VV, Beeson WT, Phillips CM, et al. Determinants of regioselective hydroxylation in the fungal polysaccharide monooxygenases. J Am Chem Soc. 2014;136:562–565.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raguz S, Yague E, Wood DA, et al. Isolation and characterization of a cellulose-growth specific gene from Agaricus bisporus. Gene. 1992;119:183–190.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armesilla AL, Thurston CF, Yague E. CEL1: a novel cellulose binding protein secreted by Agaricus bisporus during growth on crystalline cellulose. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 1994;116:293–299.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levasseur A, Drula E, Lombard V, et al. Expansion of the enzymatic repertoire of the CAZy database to integrate auxiliary redox enzymes. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2013 [ cited 2017 May 3];6(1):41. DOI:10.1186/1754–6834–6–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemsworth GR, Henrissat B, Davies GJ, et al. Discovery and characterization of a new family of lytic polysaccharide monooxygenases. Nat Chem Biol. 2014;10:122–126.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lo Leggio L, Simmons TJ, Poulen JN, et al. Structure and boosting activity of a starch-degrading lytic polysaccharide monooxygenase. Nat Commun. 2015 [ cited 2017 May 3];6:5961. DOI:10.1038/ncomms6961.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karlsson J, Saloheimo M, Siika-Aho M, et al. Homologous expression and characterization of Cel61A (EG IV) of Trichoderma reesei. Eur J Biochem. 2001;268:498–507.
   Google Scholar
• Vaaje-Kolstad G, Horn SJ, van Aalten DMF, et al. The non-catalytic chitin binding protein CBP21 from Serratia marcescens is essential for chitin degradation. J Biol Chem. 2005;280:28492–28497.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaaje-Kolstad G, Houston DR, Riemen AHR, et al. Crystal structure and binding properties of the Serratia marcescens chitin-binding protein CBP21. J Biol Chem. 2005;280:11313–11319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foreman PK, Brown D, Dankmeyer L, et al. Transcriptional regulation of biomass-degrading enzymes in the filamentous fungus Trichoderma reesei. J Biol Chem. 2003;278:31988–31997.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tian C, Beeson WT, Iavarone AT, et al. Systems analysis of plant cell wall degradation by the model filamentous fungus Neurospora crassa. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009;106:22157–22162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martinez D, Challacombe J, Morgenstern I, et al. Genome, transcriptome, and secretome analysis of wood decay fungus Postia placenta supports unique mechanisms of lignocellulose conversion. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009;106:1954–1959.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanden WA, Gaskell J, Mozuch M, et al. Comparative transcriptome and secretome analysis of wood decay fungi Postia placenta and Phanerochaete chrysosporium. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2010;76:3599–3610.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eastwood DC, Floudas D, Binder M, et al. The plant cell wall decomposing machinery underlies the functional diversity of forest fungi. Science. 2011;333:762–765.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henriksson G, Johansson G, Pettersson G. A critical review of cellobiose dehydrogenases. J Biotechnol. 2000;78:93–113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zamocky M, Ludwig R, Peterbauer C, et al. Cellobiose dehydrogenase – a flavocytochrome from wood-degrading, phytopathogenic and saprotropic fungi. Curr Protein Pept Sci. 2006;7:255–280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karkehabadi S, Hansson H, Kim S, et al. The first structure of a glycoside hydrolase family 61 member, Cel61B from Hypocrea jecorina, at 1.6A˚ resolution. J Mol Biol. 2008;383:144–154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu M, Beckham GT, Larsson AM, et al. Crystal structure and computational characterization of the lytic polysaccharide monooxygenase GH61D from the Basidiomycota fungus Phanerochaete chrysosporium. J Biol Chem. 2013;288:12828–12839.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aachmann FL, Sørlie M, Skja˚k-Bræk G, et al. NMR structure of a lytic polysaccharide monooxygenase provides insight into copper binding, protein dynamics, and substrate interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012;109:18779–18784.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forsberg Z, Røhr AK, Mekasha S, et al. Comparative study of two chitin-active and two cellulose-active AA10-type lytic polysaccharide monooxygenases. Biochemistry. 2014;53:1647–1656.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forsberg Z, Vaaje-Kolstad G, Westereng, B, et al. Cleavage of cellulose by a CBM33 protein. Protein Sci. 2011;20:1479–1483.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bey M, Zhou S, Poidevin L, et al. Cello-oligosaccharide oxidation reveals differences between two lytic polysaccharide monooxygenases (Family GH61) from Podospora anserine. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2013;79:488–496.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vu VV, Beeson WT, Span EA, et al. A family of starch-active polysaccharide monooxygenases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:13822–13827.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beeson WT, Iavarone AT, Hausmann CD, et al. Extracellular aldonolactonase from Myceliophthora thermophila. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2011;77:650–656.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sygmund C, Kracher D, Scheiblbrandner S, et al. Characterization of the two Neurospora crassa cellobiose dehydrogenases and their connection to oxidative cellulose degradation. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2012;78(17):6161–6171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conchie J, Levvy GA. Inhibition of glycosidases by aldonolactones of corresponding configuration. Biochem J. 1957;65:389–395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaaje-Kolstad G, Bohle LA, Gaseidnes S, et al. Characterization of the chitinolytic machinery of Enterococcus faecalis V583 and high resolution structure of its oxidative CBM33 enzyme. J Mol Biol. 2012;416(2):239–254.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eibinger M, Ganner T, Bubner P, et al. Cellulose surface degradation by lytic polysaccharide monooxygenase and its effect on cellulase hydrolytic efficiency. J Biol Chem. 2014;289:35929–35938.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glass NL, Schmoll M, Cate JHD, et al. Plant cell wall deconstruction by ascomycete fungi. Annu Rev Microbiol. 2013;67:477–498.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Segato F, Damasio AR, de Lucas RC, et al. Genomics review of holocellulose deconstruction by aspergilli. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2014;78:588–613.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busk PK, Lange L. Classification of fungal and bacterial lytic polysaccharide monooxygenase. BMC Genomics. 2015 [ cited 2017 May 3];16:368. DOI:10.1186/s12864-015-1601-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borisova AS, Isaksen T, Dimarogona M, et al. Structural and functional characterization of a lytic polysaccharide monoxygenase with Broad substrate specificity. J Biol Chem. 2015;290:22955–22969.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arfi Y, Shanshoum M, Rogachev I, et al. Integration of bacterial lytic polysaccharide monoxygenases into designer cellulosomes promotes enhanced cellulose degradation. PNAS. 2014;111(25):9109–9114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray KA, Zhou L, Emptago M. Bioethanol Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2006;10(2):141–146.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sajith S, Priji P, Sreedevi S, et al. An overview of fungal cellulases with an industrial perspective. J Nutr Food Sci. 2016 [ cited 2017 May 3];4:461. DOI:10.4172/2155-9600.1000461.
   Google Scholar
• Zhou J, Wang YH, Chu J, et al. Identification and purification of the main components of cellulases from a mutant strain of Trichoderma viride T 100-14. Bioresour Technol. 2008;99:6826–6833.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sukumaran RK, Singhania RR, Mathew GM, et al. Cellulase production using biomass feed stock and its application in lignocellulose saccharification for bio-ethanol production. Renew Energy. 2009;34(2):421–424.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binod P, Sindhu R, Singhania RR, et al. Bioethanol production from rice straw: an overview. Bioresour Technol. 2010;101:4767–4774.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen H, Qiu W. Key technologies for bioethanol production from lignocellulose. Biotechnol Adv. 2010;28:556–562.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sajith S, . Investigations on the lignocellulolytic activities of certain fungi with special reference to cellulase production [dissertation]. Kerala, India: University of Calicut; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Cannella D, Hsieh CC, Felby C, et al. Production and effect of aldonic acids during enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulose at high dry matter content. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2012;5:26–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olofsson K, Bertilsson M, Liden GA. Short review on SSF – an interesting process option for ethanol production from lignocellulosic feedstocks. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2008 [ cited 2017 May 3];1:7. DOI:10.1186/1754-6834-1-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cannella D, Jørgensen H. Do new cellulolytic enzyme preparations affect the industrial strategies for high solids lignocellulosic ethanol production? Biotechnol Bioeng. 2014;111:59–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beguin P, Aubert J. The biological degradation of cellulose. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 1994;13(1):25–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar