QPromoters: sequence based prediction of promoter strength in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

References

• Akan P, Deloukas P. 2008. DNA sequence and structural properties as predictors of human and mouse promoters. Gene. 410:165–176. doi:10.1016/j.gene.2007.12.011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg OG, von Hippel PH. 1987. Selection of DNA binding sites by regulatory proteins. Statistical-mechanical theory and application to operators and promoters. Journal of Molecular Biology. 193:723–743. doi:10.1016/0022-2836(87)90354-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bharanikumar R, Premkumar KAR, Palaniappan A. 2018. PromoterPredict: sequence-based modelling of Escherichia coli sigma(70) promoter strength yields logarithmic dependence between promoter strength and sequence. PeerJ. 6:e5862. doi:10.7717/peerj.5862.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bitter GA, Chang KK, Egan KM. 1991. A multi-component upstream activation sequence of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase gene promoter. Molecular and General Genetics MGG. 231:22–32. doi:10.1007/BF00293817.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chen X, Gao C, Guo L, Hu G, Luo Q, Liu J, Nielsen J, Liu L. 2018. Dceo biotechnology: tools to design, construct, evaluate, and optimize the metabolic pathway for biosynthesis of chemicals. Chemical Reviews. 118:4–72. doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.6b00804.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cock PJ, Antao T, Chang JT, Chapman BA, Cox CJ, Dalke A, Friedberg I, Hamelryck T, Kauff F, Wilczynski B, de Hoon MJL. 2009. Biopython: freely available Python tools for computational molecular biology and bioinformatics. Bioinformatics. 25:1422–1423. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btp163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crooks GE, Hon G, Chandonia JM, Brenner SE. 2004. WebLogo: a sequence logo generator. Genome Research. 14:1188–1190. doi:10.1101/gr.849004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Decoene T, De Maeseneire SL, De Mey M. 2019. Modulating transcription through development of semi-synthetic yeast core promoters. PLOS ONE. 14:e0224476. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0224476.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dreos R, Ambrosini G, Groux R, Cavin Perier R, Bucher P. 2017. The eukaryotic promoter database in its 30th year: focus on non-vertebrate organisms. Nucleic Acids Research. 45:D51–D55. doi:10.1093/nar/gkw1069.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feng X, Marchisio MA. 2021. Saccharomyces cerevisiae promoter engineering before and during the synthetic biology era. Biology (Basel). 10(6):504. doi:10.3390/biology10060504.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fischer S, Engstler C, Procopio S, Becker T. 2016. EGFP-based evaluation of temperature inducible native promoters of industrial ale yeast by using a high throughput system. LWT - Food Science and Technology. 68:556–562. doi:10.1016/j.lwt.2015.12.020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gasser B, Steiger MG, Mattanovich D. 2015. Methanol regulated yeast promoters: production vehicles and toolbox for synthetic biology. Microbial Cell Factories. 14:196. doi:10.1186/s12934-015-0387-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayat M, Gul S, Chong KT. 2020. An intelligent computational model for prediction of promoters and their strength via natural language processing. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems. 202:104034. doi:10.1016/j.chemolab.2020.104034.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubmann G, Thevelein JM, Nevoigt E. 2014. Natural and modified promoters for tailored metabolic engineering of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Methods Molecular Biology. 1152:17–42. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-0563-8_2.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jiang C, Pugh BF. 2009. Nucleosome positioning and gene regulation: advances through genomics. Nature Reviews Genetics. 10:161–172. doi:10.1038/nrg2522.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanhere A, Bansal M. 2005. Structural properties of promoters: similarities and differences between prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Nucleic Acids Research. 33:3165–3175. doi:10.1093/nar/gki627.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim S, Lee K, Bae SJ, Hahn JS. 2015. Promoters inducible by aromatic amino acids and γ-aminobutyrate (GABA) for metabolic engineering applications in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. oApplied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 99:2705–2714. doi:10.1007/s00253-014-6303-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotopka BJ, Smolke CD. 2020. Model-driven generation of artificial yeast promoters. Nat Commun. 11:2113. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-15977-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latimer LN, et al. 2014. Employing a combinatorial expression approach to characterize xylose utilization in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Metabolic Engineering. 25:20–29. doi:10.1016/j.ymben.2014.06.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee ME, DeLoache WC, Cervantes B, Dueber JE. 2015. A highly characterized yeast toolkit for modular, multipart assembly. ACS Synthetic Biology. 4:975–986. doi:10.1021/sb500366v.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li H, Shi L, Gao W, Zhang Z, Zhang L, Zhao Y, Wang G. 2022. dPromoter-XGBoost: Detecting promoters and strength by combining multiple descriptors and feature selection using XGBoost. Methods. 215–222. doi:10.1016/j.ymeth.2022.01.001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li J, Zhang Y. 2014. Relationship between promoter sequence and its strength in gene expression. The European Physical Journal E. 37:44. doi:10.1140/epje/i2014-14044-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu R, Liu L, Li X, Liu D, Yuan Y. 2020. Engineering yeast artificial core promoter with designated base motifs. Microbial Cell Factories. 19:38. doi:10.1186/s12934-020-01305-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lubliner S, et al. 2015. Core promoter sequence in yeast is a major determinant of expression level. Genome Research. 25:1008–1017. doi:10.1101/gr.188193.114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lubliner S, Keren L, Segal E. 2013. Sequence features of yeast and human core promoters that are predictive of maximal promoter activity. Nucleic Acids Research. 41:5569–5581. doi:10.1093/nar/gkt256.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Machens F, Balazadeh S, Mueller-Roeber B, Messerschmidt K. 2017. Synthetic promoters and transcription factors for heterologous protein expression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology. 5:63. doi:10.3389/fbioe.2017.00063.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miele V, Vaillant C, d'Aubenton-Carafa Y, Thermes C, Grange T. 2008. DNA physical properties determine nucleosome occupancy from yeast to fly. Nucleic Acids Research. 36:3746–3756. doi:10.1093/nar/gkn262.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nevoigt, E. 2008. Progress in metabolic engineering of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews. 72:379–412. doi:10.1128/MMBR.00025-07.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ottoz DSM, Rudolf F. 2018. Constitutive and regulated promoters in yeast: how to design and make use of promoters in S. cerevisiae. Synthetic Biology. 107–130. doi:10.1002/9783527688104.ch6.
   Google Scholar
• Portela RMC, Vogl T, Kniely C, Fischer JE, Oliveira R, Glieder A. 2017. Synthetic core promoters as universal parts for fine-tuning expression in different yeast species. ACS Synthetic Biology. 6:471–484. doi:10.1021/acssynbio.6b00178.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajkumar AS, Liu G, Bergenholm D, Arsovska D, Kristensen M, Nielsen J, Jensen MK, Keasling JD. 2016. Engineering of synthetic, stress-responsive yeast promoters. Nucleic Acids Research. 44:e136. doi:10.1093/nar/gkw553.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redden H, Morse N, Alper HS. 2015. Editorial: Yeast synthetic biology: new tools to unlock cellular function. FEMS Yeast Research. 15:1–1. doi:10.1111/1567-1364.12188.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhodius Virgil A, Mutalik Vivek K. 2010. Predicting strength and function for promoters of the Escherichia coli alternative sigma factor, σE. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 107:2854–2859. doi:10.1073/pnas.0915066107.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scalcinati G, Knuf C, Partow S, Chen Y, Maury J, Schalk M, Daviet L, Nielsen J, Siewers V. 2012. Dynamic control of gene expression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae engineered for the production of plant sesquitepene α-santalene in a fed-batch mode. Metabolic Engineering. 14:91–103. doi:10.1016/j.ymben.2012.01.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seabold S, Perktold J. 2010. Statsmodels: econometric and statistical modeling with python. Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart AJ, Hannenhalli S, Plotkin JB. 2012. Why transcription factor binding sites are ten nucleotides long. Genetics. 192:973–985. doi:10.1534/genetics.112.143370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Struhl K, Segal E. 2013. Determinants of nucleosome positioning. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology. 20:267–273. doi:10.1038/nsmb.2506.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang H, Wu Y, Deng J, Chen N, Zheng Z, Wei Y, Luo X, Keasling JD, et al. 2020. Promoter architecture and promoter engineering in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Metabolites. 10:320. doi:10.3390/metabo10080320.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinhandl K, Winkler M, Glieder A, Camattari A. 2014. Carbon source dependent promoters in yeasts. Microbial Cell Factories. 13:5. doi:10.1186/1475-2859-13-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• West RW Jr., Yocum RR, Ptashne M. 1984. Saccharomyces cerevisiae GAL1-GAL10 divergent promoter region: location and function of the upstream activating sequence UASG. Molecular and Cellular Biology. 4:2467–2478. doi:10.1128/mcb.4.11.2467-2478.1984.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Workman JL. 2006. Nucleosome displacement in transcription. Genes & Development. 20:2009–2017. doi:10.1101/gad.1435706.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yada T, et al. 2011. Linear regression models predicting strength of transcriptional activity of promoters. Genome Informatics. 25:53–60. doi:10.11234/gi.25.53.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zhao M, Yuan Z, Wu L, Zhou S, Deng Y. 2022. Precise prediction of promoter strength based on a de novo synthetic promoter library coupled with machine learning. ACS Synthetic Biology. 11:92–102. doi:10.1021/acssynbio.1c00117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao M, Zhou S, Wu L, Deng Y. 2020. Model-driven promoter strength prediction based on a fine-tuned synthetic promoter library in Escherichia coli. bioRxiv. doi:10.1101/2020.06.25.170365.
   Google Scholar
• Zhou Y, Li G, Dong J, Xing X-h, Dai J, Zhang C. 2018. MiYA, an efficient machine-learning workflow in conjunction with the YeastFab assembly strategy for combinatorial optimization of heterologous metabolic pathways in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Metabolic Engineering. 47:294–302. doi:10.1016/j.ymben.2018.03.020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar