
==== Front
Synth Syst Biotechnol
Synth Syst Biotechnol
Synthetic and Systems Biotechnology
2405-805X
KeAi Publishing

S2405-805X(24)00113-3
10.1016/j.synbio.2024.08.002
Original Research Article
Establishment of the CRISPR-Cpf1 gene editing system in Bacillus licheniformis and multiplexed gene knockout
Liu Suxin abc
Xiao Fengxu abc
Li Youran liyouran@jiangnan.edu.cn
abc⁎
Zhang Yupeng abc
Wang Yanling abc
Shi Guiyang abc
a Key Laboratory of Industrial Biotechnology, Ministry of Education, School of Biotechnology, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, 214122, PR China
b National Engineering Research Center for Cereal Fermentation and Food Biomanufacturing, Jiangnan University, 1800 Lihu Avenue, Wuxi, 214122, Jiangsu, PR China
c Jiangsu Provincial Engineering Research Center for Bioactive Product Processing, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, 214122, Jiangsu, PR China
⁎ Corresponding author. Key Laboratory of Industrial Biotechnology, Ministry of Education, School of Biotechnology, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, 214122, PR China. liyouran@jiangnan.edu.cn
08 8 2024
2025
08 8 2024
10 1 3948
23 4 2024
13 7 2024
6 8 2024
© 2024 The Authors
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Bacillus licheniformis is a significant industrial microorganism. Traditional gene editing techniques relying on homologous recombination often exhibit low efficiency due to their reliance on resistance genes. Additionally, the established CRISPR gene editing technology, utilizing Cas9 endonuclease, faces challenges in achieving simultaneous knockout of multiple genes. To address this limitation, the CRISPR-Cpf1 system has been developed, enabling multiplexed gene editing across various microorganisms. Key to the efficient gene editing capability of this system is the rigorous screening of highly effective expression elements to achieve conditional expression of protein Cpf1. In this study, we employed mCherry as a reporter gene and harnessed Pmal for regulating the expression of Cpf1 to establish the CRISPR-Cpf1 gene editing system in Bacillus licheniformis. Our system achieved a 100 % knockout efficiency for the single gene vpr and up to 80 % for simultaneous knockout of the double genes epr and mpr. Furthermore, the culture of a series of protease-deficient strains revealed that the protease encoded by aprE contributed significantly to extracellular enzyme activity (approximately 80 %), whereas proteases encoded by vpr, epr, and mpr genes contributed to a smaller proportion of extracellular enzyme activity. These findings provide support for effective molecular modification and metabolic regulation in industrial organisms.

Keywords

Bacillus licheniformis
Gene editing
CRISPR-Cpf1
MCherry
==== Body
pmc1 Introduction

Bacillus licheniformis is a Gram-positive facultative anaerobe commonly found in soil, known for its strong resistance, moderate growth rate, rich enzyme systems, and high enzyme production [[1], [2], [3], [4]]. It is a widely used industrial microbial strain. However, the lack of efficient gene editing tools and extremely low transformation efficiency greatly constrain molecular biology research on B. licheniformis, severely hindering the development of engineered strains and their application in industrial production [5].

Current gene editing methods for B. licheniformis are limited to temperature-sensitive plasmid knockout, linear fragment transformation, and CRISPR-Cas9 system knockout [[6], [7], [8]]. The temperature-sensitive plasmid knockout relies on the cell's own homologous double exchange to knock out the target gene, followed by recombinase removal of the resistance marker gene [6]; for linear fragment knockout, direct transformation of knockout cassette fragments utilizes the cell's own homologous recombination to replace the target gene [7]. Due to the extremely low endogenous recombination efficiency of B. licheniformis, both methods depend on extensive colony PCR to have a chance of selecting positive colonies [9]. Moreover, plasmid construction is complex and time-consuming, unable to perform simultaneous multigene knockouts, with very low editing efficiency, and even prone to resistance residue. Compared to the previous two gene editing systems, the CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing system has the advantages of high knockout efficiency, simple operation, and short cycle [10]. However, it also has many defects, such as the large relative molecular mass of Cas9 making transformation difficult, high off-target rate, and certain toxicity, which limit its application in B. licheniformis [11]. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop a simple and efficient genome editing tool for B. licheniformis.

The introduction of Cpf1 has provided an alternative to the CRISPR toolkit [12]. Compared to the classic SpCas9, the CRISPR-associate protein and crRNA from Francisella novicida Cpf1 (FnCpf1) are shorter, and Cpf1 endonuclease requires only a single promoter to drive multiple crRNAs simultaneously [13,14]. The key components of the CRISPR-Cpf1 system include the Cpf1 protein, crRNA, and the provided homology-directed repair (HDR) template. The crRNA guides the Cpf1 protein to the target site; Cpf1 is responsible for cutting the target DNA, resulting in a double-stranded break (DSB) [15]. Non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR) are two mechanisms for repairing DSBs in the CRISPR mechanism, with the latter being predominantly used in bacteria [9,16]. The homology repair template allows us to produce specific gene knockout fragments via polymerase chain reaction, not only enabling more efficient screening of gene knockout strains but also improving genome stability [17]. Yang found that FnCpf1 is less toxic than Cas9 and achieved a 100 % editing efficiency in Corynebacterium glutamicum [18]. Cui conducted knockout validation in Bacillus subtilis and concluded that the functionality of CRISPR-Cpf1 in single-gene knockouts exceeded that of the same strategy using CRISPR-Cas9, with the editing efficiency also reaching 100 % [13]. To date, the CRISPR-Cpf1 system has been used as an efficient genomic editing tool in various biological systems [13,[18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24]], yet a B. licheniformis gene editing method based on the CRISPR-Cpf1 system has not yet been established.

Introducing the CRISPR-Cpf1 system into B. licheniformis presents a significant challenge due to the inherently low transformation efficiency of recombinant vectors, which is a natural characteristic of the bacterium [8]. The size of the vector and the expression of the carried genes are two main factors that influence this process; the former affects substance transport across membranes, while the latter hinders cell growth and reproduction [10]. To mitigate the negative impact of vector size, we constructed a CRISPR-Cpf1 gene knockout vector using the small pJOE8999 plasmid as a backbone. Fine-tuning the expression level of Cas proteins remains a key aspect of applying the CRISPR-Cpf1 system [10]. Liu believes that, compared to constitutive expression systems, inducible expression systems are beneficial for dynamic gene regulation and effectively prevent the impact of Cas protein expression on host cell growth [25]. To reduce the strong toxicity of nucleases on host cells, Wang chose the lactose-inducible promoter Plac to drive Cpf1 expression in Clostridium sporogenes [24]. Therefore, inducible expression systems can minimize the toxicity caused by Cpf1 gene expression. The xylose-induced promoter and mannitol-induced promoter are the most commonly used inducible promoters in B. licheniformis [8,26]. The xylose-induced expression system is strictly controlled by the repressor protein encoded by xylR, offering high expression levels but at a high cost. Additionally, the xylose isomerase regulon contains xylR and Pxyl elements spanning 1297bp, inevitably resulting in oversized recombinant plasmids that affect transformation [27,28]. The mannitol-inducible expression system uses a cheap and stable carbon source as an inducer, with the advantages of being efficient and non-toxic. However, studies have shown that the mannitol promoter has basal leakage, and furthermore, the recovery medium contains mannitol and sorbitol, which could directly induce expression leading to transformation failure or even cell death [26]. There is an urgent need to develop a stringent inducible promoter to regulate the expression of the Cpf1 gene in B. licheniformis. In our study, we used red fluorescent protein to verify the stringency of the maltose-inducible expression system. Maltose serves as an inducer with low industrial cost and is safe and non-toxic, making it an ideal choice for regulating expression systems [29]. We utilized the pJOE8999 vector as a backbone and harnessed the maltose promoter Pmal to construct a CRISPR-Cpf1 gene editing system, providing support for effective molecular modification and metabolic regulation in B. licheniformis and offering prospects for genetic modification in other industrially relevant Bacillus strains.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Bacterial strains, plasmids, and culture conditions

The bacterial strains, plasmids, and primers used in this study are listed in Table S1. Table S2 lists the primers used in the experiment and the primers designed. A series of recombinant strains were constructed using B. licheniformis CICIM B1391 as the parent strain, while E. coli JM109 was used for constructing recombinant vectors.

The electroporation of B. licheniformis was conducted with reference to the method described by Xiao [30]. Both B. licheniformis and E. coli were cultured in LB medium (1 % tryptone, 0.5 % yeast extract, 1 % NaCl, pH 7.2). Antibiotics (kanamycin at 30 μg/mL, tetracycline at 20 μg/mL, and ampicillin at 100 μg/mL; purchased from Sigma) were added to the medium as needed. Unless otherwise specified, the culture temperature was maintained at 37 °C with a shaking speed of 250 rpm.

The medium used for the production of alkaline protease (fermentation medium: 3 % sucrose, 0.912 % K2HPO4⋅3H2O, 0.136 % KH2PO4, 1 % (NH4)2HPO4, 0.05 % FeCl3, 1 % tryptone, 0.5 % yeast powder, 0.2 % corn steep liquor dry powder, 5 % liquid nitrogen source, pH 7.2)

2.2 Plasmid construction

Gene fragments were amplified and identified using 2 × Phanta Max Master Mix polymerase (Vazyme Biotech, Nanjing, China) and 2 × Taq PCR Master Mix polymerase (TaKaRa, Hangzhou, China). Plasmids were assembled using fast restriction enzymes and T4 DNA ligase (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA). The constructed recombinant plasmids were confirmed by sequencing (Sangon Biotech, Shanghai, China), and all primers and single-stranded DNA were synthesized by Sangon Biotech (Shanghai, China).

2.2.1 Construction of maltose-inducible expression vector

The shuttle vector pHY served as the backbone for constructing the maltose-inducible expression vector. Using chromosomal DNA from B. licheniformis CICIM B1391 as a template, the maltose promoter (Pmal) fragment was amplified by PCR with primers Pmal-BglII-F and Pmal-XhoI-R. The pHY-eGFP vector was digested with restriction enzymes BglII and XhoI to obtain a linearized pHY-eGFP vector, into which the Pmal fragment was cloned by homologous recombination, resulting in the pHY-Pmal-eGFP plasmid.

The mCherry fragment synthesized by the company had 15 bp homologous arms on both ends. The eGFP gene fragment was excised from pHY-Pmal-eGFP using restriction enzymes XhoI and SalI to obtain a linearized pHY-Pmal vector. The mCherry fragment was cloned into the linearized pHY-Pmal vector by homologous recombination, and the plasmid pHY-Pmal-mCherry was extracted.

2.2.2 Construction of vpr gene knockout vector

The gene encoding the protease vpr in B. licheniformis CICIM B1391 (CP005965 REGION: 4022002–4024422) was selected as the target gene for knockout experiments. The shuttle vector pJOE8999 served as the backbone for constructing the pJOE8999-Pmal-Cpf1-vpr recombinant plasmid.

Using chromosomal DNA from B. licheniformis as a template, the Pmal fragment was amplified by PCR with primer pair Pmal-F/Pmal-R. The Cpf1 gene fragment was amplified from a synthetic Cpf1 gene template using primer pair Cpf1-F/Cpf1-R. The Pmal-Cpf1 fragment was obtained through overlapping PCR using Pmal and Cpf1 fragments as templates with primer pair Pmal-F/Cpf1-R. Using a vector carrying the amyL terminator from the laboratory as a template, the amyL terminator fragment was amplified by PCR with primer pair ter-F/ter-R. Finally, using primer pair Pmal-F/ter-R, the Cpf1 expression cassette was obtained through another round of overlapping PCR using Pmal-Cpf1 and amyL terminator fragments as templates. Homologous recombination was performed between the expression cassette and the pJOE8999 shuttle vector digested with KpnI/BsrGI to obtain the pJOE8999-Pmal-Cpf1 recombinant plasmid. The three PN2-mediated crRNA expression frames were synthesized by Shanghai Biotechnology, and were used as templates for PCR amplification with the primers crRNA-F/crRNA-R and homologous recombination with the SmaI/EcoRI digested pJOE8999-Pmal-Cpf1 plasmid to obtain the three pJOE8999-Pmal-Cpf1-crRNA plasmids. Among them, the location choices of the three targets are described in Table S1.

Using the B. licheniformis genome as a template, PCR amplification was performed with primer pairs vpr-Left-F/vpr-Left-R and vpr-Right-F/vpr-Right-R to obtain the left and right homologous arm sequences of the vpr gene, respectively. Then, using the left and right homologous arm fragments as templates, overlapping PCR amplification was carried out with primer pair vpr-Left-F/vpr-Right-R to obtain the left-right homologous arm sequence. This sequence was ligated to three pJOE8999-Pmal-Cpf1-crRNA plasmids double digested by SmaI/BamHI to obtain three vpr knockout plasmids, named pJOEC1, pJOEC2, and pJOEC3, respectively.

2.2.3 Construction of mpr-epr gene knockout vector

The genes encoding mpr protease (CP005965 REGION: 338171–339112) and epr protease (CP005965 REGION: 1221255–1223030) from B. licheniformis CICIM B1391 were selected as targets for the double knockout experiment. Using the knockout plasmid pJOE8999-Pmal-Cpf1-vpr-1 as a template, three fragment PCRs were performed with primer trios mpr-epr-crRNA-F1/mpr-epr-crRNA-R1, mpr-epr-crRNA-F2/mpr-epr-crRNA-R2, and mpr-epr-crRNA-F3/mpr-epr-crRNA-R3 to obtain three fragments named mpr-epr-crRNA1, mpr-epr-crRNA2, and mpr-epr-crRNA3. Subsequently, overlapping PCR amplification was performed with mpr-epr-crRNA1 and mpr-epr-crRNA2, mpr-epr-crRNA2 and mpr-epr-crRNA3 using primer pairs mpr-epr-crRNA-F1/mpr-epr-crRNA-R2 and mpr-epr-crRNA-F2/mpr-epr-crRNA-R3 to obtain two fragments named mpr-epr-crRNA1-mpr-epr-crRNA2 and mpr-epr-crRNA2-mpr-epr-crRNA3. Finally, using these two fragments as templates, overlap extension PCR amplification was carried out with primer pair mpr-epr-crRNA-F1/mpr-epr-crRNA-R3 to obtain the final fragment mpr-epr-crRNA. This fragment was ligated with the pJOE8999-Pmal-Cpf1-vpr-1 plasmid digested with EcoRI/SmaI to complete the crRNA replacement, preparing for the next step of homologous arm replacement. Next, the homologous arms were assembled. Using the B. licheniformis genome as a template, PCR amplification was performed with primer pairs epr-Left-F/epr-Left-R and epr-Right-F/epr-Right-R to obtain the left and right homologous arm sequences of the epr gene. Then, using these two fragments as templates, overlapping PCR amplification was carried out with primer pair epr-Left-F/epr-Right-R to obtain the epr homologous arm sequence. Similarly, PCR amplification was performed with primer pairs mpr-Left-F/mpr-Left-R and mpr-Right-F/mpr-Right-R to obtain the left and right homologous arm sequences of the mpr gene. Then, using these two fragments as templates, overlapping PCR amplification was carried out with primer pair mpr-Left-F/mpr-Right-R to obtain the mpr homologous arm sequence. Finally, using the epr and mpr homologous arm sequences as templates, overlap extension PCR amplification was performed with primer pair epr-Left-F/mpr-Right-R to obtain the epr-mpr homologous arm sequence fragment. This fragment was ligated with the prepared plasmid digested with SmaI/KpnI to complete the replacement of homologous arms, ultimately obtaining the pJOE8999-Pmal-Cpf1-epr-mpr double knockout vector and named pJOECEM.

2.3 Genome editing of Bacillus licheniformis using the CRISPR-Cpf1 system

The constructed knockout vectors pJOEC1, pJOEC2, pJOEC3 (listed in Table S1) were electroporated into competent B. licheniformis cells, resulting in recombinant strains BLCP1, BLCP2, BLCP3 [30]. These recombinant strains were cultured in LB medium supplemented with kanamycin at 37 °C and 250 rpm. When the cells were grown for 6 h and the OD600 reached about 4, a 1.5 % concentration of maltose inducer was added to activate the expression of Cpf1 protein. After an additional 24 h of incubation, colony PCR verification was performed using the primer pair vpr-qiaochu-yz-F/vpr-qiaochu-yz-R, followed by DNA sequencing of the knockout strains. The same method was applied to achieve knockout of the mpr and epr genes. The knockout efficiency was evaluated by randomly selecting transformants from each transformation, and the knockout strains were identified by polymerase chain reaction, gel electrophoresis and Sanger sequencing [5]. The gene editing efficiency is calculated as the percentage of knockout strains to the total number of strains.

2.4 Elimination of knockout plasmids

Since pE194 cannot replicate at high temperatures, to eliminate the gene knockout plasmid from positive strains, single colonies were inoculated into LB medium without antibiotics at 37 °C (250 rpm) [31]. If necessary, 1.5 % maltose was added to enhance plasmid elimination efficiency. After scribing on a flat plate, the cultures were spread onto antibiotic-free plates. Single colonies grown on these plates were screened on agar plates with and without kanamycin. Colonies sensitive to kanamycin indicated successful plasmid loss and were named BL2Δvpr and BL2Δepr-mpr, respectively.

2.5 Determination of biomass and alkaline protease activity

The strains BL2, BL2Δvpr, and BL2Δepr-mpr were cultured overnight for approximately 16 h until the OD600 reached 4.0–4.5. A 3 % inoculum was then transferred to fermentation medium and incubated at 37 °C with shaking at 250 rpm. Samples were collected after 24h, 48h, and 72h of fermentation to determine OD600 and enzyme activity. An Ultrospec 3000 spectrophotometer (Pharmacia Biotech, Piscataway, NJ, USA) was used to monitor biomass by measuring OD600, diluting cell culture samples to an appropriate concentration prior to detection. Protease activity was measured using the Folin method, with some modifications based on practical conditions: casein was pre-wetted with NaOH and dissolved in phosphate buffer during a 30-min boiling water bath; diluted enzyme solution (1 mL) was mixed with casein solution (1 mL), and the reaction at 40 °C was stopped after 10 min by adding 2 mL TCA [32]. One unit of enzyme activity (U) is defined as the amount of enzyme required to produce 1 μg molecule of tyrosine per minute from casein hydrolysis at 40 °C and pH = 10.5.

2.6 Statistical analysis methods

All experiments were independently repeated three times, and the average value was taken as the final result. The differences between two sets of data were analyzed using a 2-tailed Student's t-test, while the differences between multiple sets of data were compared using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test. "*" and "* * *" were used to indicate the significance of p < 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively.

3 Results and discussion

3.1 The red fluorescent protein mCherry is superior to green fluorescent protein eGFP

Fluorescent proteins are often used as reporter genes due to their stability, high sensitivity, and ease of detection, allowing for the measurement of transcriptional expression characteristics of upstream promoters. Compared to the classic green fluorescent protein eGFP, red fluorescent proteins have a broader range of excitation and emission wavelengths, lower cytotoxicity, and variants like mCherry exhibit better maturation and excellent photostability with lower background levels [33].

E. coli, B. licheniformis, and B. subtilis were each inoculated into 15 mL LB and fermented for 24 h before sampling. The samples were washed twice with PBS buffer, diluted to an appropriate concentration, and the OD600 and fluorescence values were measured. The fluorescence exhibited by the three bacterial strains under different excitation and emission wavelengths was analyzed. As shown in Fig. 1a, the baseline fluorescence values of the three original strains for different fluorescences were almost identical. Under the detection conditions for the red fluorescent protein mCherry, the baseline fluorescence values produced were the lowest at only 15, which is approximately 1/13th of the fluorescence value produced under YFP detection conditions and 1/5th of that under eGFP detection conditions. This indicates that fluorescent proteins are universally applicable to different bacterial species, and the results show that mCherry has excellent photostability and the lowest background.Fig. 1 The fluorescence intensity of mCherry was analyzed using primitive bacteria. (a) The fluorescence intensities produced by the three primitive bacteria under different fluorescence detection conditions, where 516/529 denotes the peak excitation and peak emission wavelengths of YFP; 540/533 denotes the peak excitation and peak emission wavelengths of mBannana; 548/562 denotes the peak excitation and peak emission wavelengths of mOrange; 488/509 denotes the peak excitation and peak emission wavelengths of eGFP; and 488/509 denotes the peak excitation and peak emission wavelengths of eGFP; 568/585 for peak excitation and peak emission wavelengths of mTangerine; 574/596 for peak excitation and peak emission wavelengths of mStrawberry; and 587/610 for peak excitation and peak emission wavelengths of mCherry. (The average of three repetitions, and the error bar corresponds to a standard deviation). (b) Linear relationship analysis of the fluorescence intensity of mCherry with OD600.

Fig. 1

Subsequently, the recombinant strain BLPM was inoculated into 15 mL LB and cultured for 24 h. The sample was diluted to a certain multiple to determine the linear range of fluorescence values and OD600. As shown in Fig. 1b, there is a linear response relationship when OD600 is within the range of 0.056–0.698, with the best linear correlation between fluorescence values and cell density of the bacteria. Fluorescence detection settings for the microplate reader: shake the microplate for 10s, excitation wavelength at 587 nm, absorbance at 610 nm, gain value at 120.

3.2 Exploration and identification of maltose promoters

Promoters, as a crucial component of expression systems, play a key role in regulating gene expression levels. To better regulate the expression of Cpf1, we mined maltose promoters from the maltose operon, which mainly regulates maltose metabolism. The operon consists of three functional genes: malA, malR, malP [34]. B. subtilis can utilize maltose and has increased the activity of the Pmal through site-directed mutagenesis [29]. Wen and others have developed a maltose-inducible expression system based on the Pmal in B. subtilis, using GFP as a reporter gene to confirm the effectiveness of this expression system [35]. At the amino acid level, metabolic pathways, and enzyme production, B. licheniformis shares high similarity with B. subtilis [36]. An expression system based on Pmal has not yet been constructed in B. licheniformis, suggesting potential applications for this inducible expression system in B. licheniformis. Using the red fluorescent protein gene (mCherry) as a reporter gene, we evaluated the inducible regulatory performance of the Pmal promoter in B. licheniformis by adding corresponding inducers.

3.3 Fluorescence intensity affected by different carbon sources

Firstly, the fluorescence intensity under the influence of different carbon sources was tested. The recombinant strain BLPM was inoculated into LB medium supplemented with 1.5 % maltose, 1.5 % maltodextrin, 1.5 % trehalose, 1.5 % glucose, and 1.5 % sucrose, respectively. A single colony of BLP was inoculated into LB medium as a blank control. After 24 h of fermentation, samples were taken, washed twice with PBS buffer, diluted, and then the mCherry fluorescence intensity and OD600 values were measured. As shown in Fig. 2a, the fluorescence value was 3727 AU/OD600 when maltose was added. When equal concentrations of trehalose, maltodextrin, glucose, and sucrose were added, the detected fluorescence values were 102, 78, 115, and 58 AU/OD600, respectively, indicating a clear maltose-induced characteristic in the strain. We also tested the performance of the xylose promoter under the same conditions and found that the maltose promoter was more rigorous, and the relevant proof is described in detail in the supporting information. Furthermore, the fluorescence values produced by different concentrations of maltose were tested by inoculating single colonies of BLPM into media with final maltose concentrations of 0 %, 0.5 %, 1 %, 1.5 %, and 2 %, and measuring mCherry fluorescence intensity and OD600 values. As shown in Fig. 2b, the unit fluorescence intensity of the mCherry protein gene regulated by the promoter Pmal increased with the concentration of maltose before decreasing, suggesting that the expression level of the target gene could be regulated by the concentration of maltose. Moreover, when the concentration of maltose was 1.5 %, the induction effect was optimal. In order to investigate the impact of maltose addition time on recombinant strain growth, we conducted a series of experiments wherein maltose was added at varying time points. The results of these experiments are presented in Fig. 2c. Notably, the growth of the recombinant strains was inhibited by as much as 88.24 % when maltose was added at 0 h. On the other hand, it is worth noting that we found that the growth of Bacillus licheniformis wild bacteria was also significantly inhibited when maltose was added at 0 h. This particular phenomenon has been reported in Saccharomyces cerevisiae [37,38], which also reveals that the cells should be given sufficient time to grow when the inducer is added. Therefore, we chose to add maltose for 6 h in order to minimize its effect (Fig. 2d). In summary, the results indicate that the maltose-inducible expression system is suitable for producing heterologous proteins in B. licheniformis and that maltose is an ideal effector for initiating Cpf1 nuclease.Fig. 2 Expression of mCherry under the control of mal promoter. (a) Effect of different carbon sources on the strength of the mal promoter in the mCherry reporter assay. (b) Effect of different concentrations of maltose on the strength of the mal promoter in the mCherry reporter assay. (c) The growth status of the strain under different maltose induced conditions (d) Strain growth was inhibited by adding maltose at 0 h and normalized by adding maltose at 6 h.

Fig. 2

3.4 1.5 % maltose induction for Cpf1 expression used in genome editing

Although the CRISPR-Cpf1 system has been used for genome editing in various organisms, there have been no reports on its use in B. licheniformis [39]. Here, we attempted to use plasmid pJOE8999-Pmal-Cpf1-vpr to knock out the vpr gene in B. licheniformis. For gene editing, the first step is to design specific target sites. With the help of homologous repair templates, the identified targets can be modified or removed, and specific sequences can be introduced into the genome to achieve precise genome editing. In order to cleave the vpr gene, we designed three sgRNA targets and obtained three recombinant strains, named BLC1, BLC2, and BLC3, respectively (listed in Table S1). The Cpf1-mediated genome editing process induced by maltose can be divided into three main steps, as shown in Fig. 3. First, recombinant strains BLC1, BLC2, and BLC3 were cultured at 37 °C and 250 rpm for 6 h. During this period, the recombinant strains proliferated extensively and the recombinant plasmids replicated in large quantities. Then, 1.5 % maltose was added to the medium to induce Cpf1 expression, triggering DNA double-strand breaks and homologous recombination repair; after an additional 24 h of culture, lines were streaked on solid medium containing 30 μg/mL kanamycin to form single colonies, which were then verified by colony PCR to confirm successful vpr gene knockout. Finally, colonies with successful knockouts were inoculated into LB medium and cultured at 37 °C (250 rpm) (if necessary, 1.5 % maltose could be added to improve plasmid elimination efficiency), streaked on non-antibiotic plates, and then single colonies grown were screened on two agar plates with or without kanamycin to identify strains that had successfully lost the plasmid.Fig. 3 Overview of CRISPR-Cpf1 gene editing methods established in Bacillus licheniformis. The letter K in the lower right corner indicates that the medium contains kanamycin resistance.

Fig. 3

Three recombinant strains used for vpr gene knockout were induced and cultured, in general, gene-deficient strains can be obtained by colony PCR validation of the transformants, and the knockout efficiency is the number of gene-deficient strains obtained divided by the total number of strains [15,40]. Theoretically, only strains with successful knockout can survive and form single colonies visible to the naked eye. In practice, the number of single colonies on the plate was found to be low, with only a few colonies observed following the induction and strip culture process. In the vpr knockout experiment, only 20 transformants were obtained, and the relevant images are presented in the supplementary materials, colony PCR was performed using the primers vpr-qiaochu-yz-F and vpr-qiaochu-yz-R. Successful gene knockout strains produced a 2007 bp band, while strains with unsuccessful knockouts retained the original 4290 bp band from the wild-type genome (Fig. 4a). The colony PCR results showed that the target gene disruption efficiency for pJOEC1, pJOEC2, and pJOEC3 was 100 %, indicating that the CRISPR-Cpf1 gene editing system was successfully constructed in B. licheniformis and could efficiently knock out the vpr gene.Fig. 4 Confirmation of disruption of vpr, epr and mpr. The DNA sequencing, alignment result of the deletion-carrying mutant and agarose gel electrophoresis. (a) vpr gene deletion, losing 2283 bp. (b) epr gene deletion, losing 1861 bp. (c) mpr gene deletion, losing 1203 bp.

Fig. 4

The same procedure was followed for the dual gene knockout of epr and mpr resulted in 10 transformants. The knockout efficiency of epr was verified using the primers epr-qiaochu-yz-F and epr-qiaochu-yz-R, with successful knockouts producing a 1588 bp band, and unsuccessful ones retaining the original 3449 bp band from the wild-type genome (Fig. 4b). Similarly, mpr knockout efficiency was verified using the primers mpr-qiaochu-yz-F and mpr-qiaochu-yz-R, with successful knockouts producing a 1205 bp band, and unsuccessful ones retaining the original 2408 bp band from the wild-type genome (Fig. 4c). The results showed that for plasmids designed for dual gene knockouts, the disruption efficiency was 100 % for epr and 80 % for mpr, indicating that the efficiency of the CRISPR-Cpf1 dual gene editing system was lower than that of the single gene editing system in B. licheniformis.

3.5 Characteristics of gene-edited strains

Bacillus species secrete a variety of extracellular proteases, which can degrade extracellular proteins to varying degrees depending on their folding state and proteolytic sensitivity [41]. Therefore, the presence of extracellular proteases hinders the expression of heterologous secreted proteins, increasing the difficulty of industrial production in Bacillus [42]. Studies have shown that knocking out extracellular protease genes in Bacillus subtilis can significantly increase the yield of various enzymes including xylanase, α-amylase, and endoglucanase [43]. By suppressing protease expression, the yield of α-amylase in B. licheniformis increased by 250 % [41]. Serine proteases and metalloproteases are among the extracellular proteases produced by Bacillus licheniformis [36]. Therefore, we attempted to knock out the alkaline protease gene vpr as our first target to verify knockout efficiency. Subsequently, we knocked out the alkaline protease genes epr and mpr to obtain chassis strains suitable for the expression of exogenous proteins.

Through molecular-level verification, we successfully obtained gene knockout strains BL2Δvpr and BL2Δepr-mpr. We measured the growth curves of these strains (Fig. 5a) and also tested our laboratory-preserved BL2ΔaprE strain, which was obtained through a temperature-sensitive plasmid combined with the FLP/FRT recombination system [44]. The OD600 at 72 h of growth showed that the growth rates of knockout strains BL2Δvpr, BL2Δepr-mpr, and BL2ΔaprE were essentially consistent with that of the wild-type strain. This result indicates that disruption of the vpr, epr, mpr, and aprE genes did not have a significant negative impact on bacterial growth.Fig. 5 Growth of the original strain BL2and knockout strains BL2Δvpr, BL2Δepr-mpr and BL2ΔaprE of Bacillus licheniformis and their protease activities after fermentation. (a) Growth and alkaline protease activity of BL2 and BL2Δvpr, BL2Δepr-mpr and BL2ΔaprE. (b) The alkaline protease activities of BL2 and BL2Δvpr, BL2Δepr-mpr and BL2ΔaprE, Bars with "*" and "* * *" indicate p < 0.05 and 0.001 relative to the original strain, respectively.

Fig. 5

To further validate the knockout effects, the specific activities of alkaline proteases from the four strains were measured at pH 10.5 after 24h, 48h, and 72h of cultivation, as shown in Fig. 5b. As expected, the specific activity values of alkaline proteases in the three knockout strains decreased to some extent. Specifically, the strains BL2Δvpr and BL2Δepr-mpr showed a slight reduction in enzyme activity compared to the original strain, but not a significant difference. In contrast, the BL2ΔaprE strain exhibited a dramatic decline in enzyme activity, reaching only 43.95 %, 18.02 %, and 18.22 % of the original strain's activity after 24h, 48h, and 72h, respectively, indicating a significant difference. These results suggest that the proteases vpr, epr, and mpr that we knocked out are not the main alkaline proteases in B. licheniformis, whereas aprE has high extracellular protease activity in this species, consistent with published data [45,46]. In Bacillus species, eight extracellular proteases play a major role: aprE, bpr, epr, mpr, nprB, nprE, vpr, and wprA; among them, aprE, bpr, epr, and vpr are alkaline proteases, with aprE and nprE accounting for the largest proportion of total extracellular proteolytic activity [47]. In summary, through molecular-level validation and enzyme production level verification, the knockout effects were confirmed. This demonstrates that the CRISPR-Cpf1 gene editing system is suitable for gene editing in B. licheniformis and represents a highly promising gene editing tool.

4 Discussion

Gene editing is an essential tool for molecular modification, and the advent of the third-generation gene editing tool, the CRISPR system, has propelled the rapid development of gene editing technologies [48]. In previous studies, researchers developed a CRISPR-Cas9 mediated genome editing tool in B. licheniformis, and Li constructed an integrated CRISPR/Cas9 expression vector targeting the α-amyL gene of B. licheniformis, with editing efficiencies at three target sites of 64.3 %, 70.9 %, and 47.1 % [8]. The knockout efficiency was less than 80 %, and the knockout plasmid was as long as 10880 bp, which is not conducive to transformation; Lu performed single-gene knockouts in B. licheniformis based on CRISPR-Cas9, with knockout efficiencies for uprT, amyL, and chiA genes of 97.3 %, 90 %, and 90 %, respectively, exceeding 90 % efficiency. However, their knockout plasmid system was too large, for example, the pWH-Δupp plasmid was 13488 bp long, which exacerbated the difficulty of transformation [15]. None of these proved whether the system could accurately perform multi-gene editing. Chen integrated CRISPR-Cas9 nickase into the genome of B. licheniformis, achieving a knockout efficiency of 100 % for yvmC and a simultaneous double-gene knockout efficiency of 11.6 % for epr and wprA, indicating a disadvantage of lower multi-gene editing efficiency [5]. Subsequently, researchers developed the CRISPR-Cpf1 gene editing technology and made breakthrough progress. Wang Yi used the CRISPR-Cpf1 system to successfully delete two genes, spo0A and pta, in Clostridium beijerinckii with an editing efficiency of 100 % [24]. Liu achieved a double-gene knockout in Bacillus subtilis with 100 % efficiency using CRISPR-Cpf1 [49]. Liang used the CRISPR-Cpf1 system in Pichia pastoris, achieving single-gene disruption rates of about 99 % and double-gene editing efficiencies of about 80 % [50]. CRISPR-Cpf1 demonstrated high editing efficiencies in both single and double-gene knockouts. In this study, we introduced the CRISPR-Cpf1 gene editing system into B. licheniformis for the first time and compared to the CRISPR-Cas9 system, our newly constructed editing system has several advantages. Firstly, our single-gene knockout efficiency is higher, achieving up to 100 % for the vpr gene deletion. Secondly, we validated multi-gene knockouts with good results, reaching up to 80 % efficiency for simultaneous epr and mpr double-gene deletions. Lastly, our plasmid is smaller; the vpr gene knockout plasmid is only 8424bp, reducing transformation stress. This system provides support for effective molecular modification and metabolic regulation in B. licheniformis and offers application prospects for genetic modification in other industrially relevant Bacillus species.

As an important component of the expression system, promoters play a key role in regulating gene expression levels [51]. Compared to constitutive promoters, inducible expression systems have the unique advantage of being able to artificially control the initiation or shutdown of gene transcription, separating bacterial growth from exogenous gene expression processes, reducing early-stage bacterial burden while promoting later-stage product accumulation [[52], [53], [54]]. In recent years, various types of inducible promoters have been developed and applied in metabolic regulation. Commonly used inducible promoters include the xylose-inducible promoter Pxyl, sucrose-inducible promoter PsacB, and IPTG-inducible promoter Pgrac [52]. The xylose-inducible expression system is characterized by high specificity, stringency, and safety [55,56]. Studies have shown that sucrose-induced expression of green fluorescent protein is significantly lower than that induced by xylose, and the stringency of sucrose promoters is not high [57]. IPTG concentration significantly affects protein expression levels and is a strong inducer; however, there is leaky expression in the absence of IPTG [58,59]. The strength of xylose-inducible promoters and sucrose-inducible promoters still needs to be improved, while the high cost of xylose and IPTG and safety concerns about IPTG hinder the widespread application of related expression systems. The maltose promoter shows advantages [29,[34], [35], [36]]; using mCherry as a reporter gene, we explored and identified the stringency of the inducible promoter Pmal; a 1.5 % inducer can achieve efficient expression of fluorescent proteins. Expressing exogenous genes with maltose promoters has advantages such as low cost and safety of the inducer maltose, high induction strength, and good controllability, making it particularly suitable for industrial production applications.

A rich array of proteases is one of the main characteristics of the Bacillus genus, with these enzymes located in the cytoplasm, cell membrane, cell wall, and external environment [46]. They assist in acquiring peptides and amino acids from organic matter and play a significant role in spore formation [60,61]. With advancing research, eight extracellular proteases have been identified, including aprE, bpr, epr, vpr, and wprA, which belong to the serine protease family, and mpr, nprB, and nprE, which are metalloproteases [[62], [63], [64], [65], [66], [67], [68], [69]]. Fourteen proteases have been identified within the cytoplasm of vegetative cells, where they are active, indicating a more complex classification of intracellular proteases [46]. Precise knockout of genes encoding these proteases is essential for revealing their functions. Researchers constructed strain DB104 by knocking out the aprE and nprE genes using the native recombination system and found that the extracellular protease activity was only 4 % of the wild type, but spores still formed normally, indicating that neither aprE nor nprE proteases are essential for cell growth and spore formation [69]. Further construction of strain WB600 (ΔaprE, Δbpr, Δepr, Δmpr, ΔnprB, ΔnprE) revealed that after 24 h of culture, the extracellular protease activity was 0.32 % of the wild type. However, as the culture time increased, the activity gradually rose, suggesting the presence of other uncharacterized minor extracellular proteases [70]. With new proteases being identified, researchers further constructed WB700 (WB600Δvpr) and WB800 (WB600ΔwprA) [71,72]. On the other hand, since the discovery that knocking out endogenous proteases can significantly increase the expression level of secreted proteins, these engineered strains have continuously served as advantageous host strains [70]. Yuan expressed PGA in DB104, detecting an expression level 5 times higher than the wild-type host harboring the same plasmid [73]. This protease-deficient host can also express high levels of endoxylanase [74]. Shi obtained a high-yielding strain of recombinant keratinase using WB600 as a host, while Mu enhanced the expression of d-allulose 3-epimerase [75,76]. Zhang efficiently synthesized CAM-W using WB700 [77]. Zhu achieved high-efficiency expression of nattokinase using WB800 as a host [71]. In summary, the CRISPR-Cpf1 gene editing technology constructed in this study is not only an effective tool for researching endogenous proteases in Bacillus but also can be used for constructing high-yield protein host strains.

Notes

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Suxin Liu: Writing – original draft, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Visualization. Fengxu Xiao: Supervision, Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Visualization. Youran Li: Supervision, Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – review & editing. Yupeng Zhang: Conceptualization, Software, Supervision. Yanling Wang: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software. Guiyang Shi: Funding acquisition, Supervision.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Appendix A Supplementary data

The following are the Supplementary data to this article:Multimedia component 1

Multimedia component 1

Multimedia component 2

Multimedia component 2

Acknowledgements

This study was financially supported by the National Key Research & Development Program of China (2020YFA0907700 , 2018YFA0900504 and 2018YFA0900300 ), the National Natural Foundation of China (32172174 , 31401674 ). the Jiangsu Funding Program for Excellent Postdoctoral Talent (2024ZB371 ).

Peer review under responsibility of KeAi Communications Co., Ltd.

Appendix A Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.synbio.2024.08.002.
==== Refs
References

1 Cutting S.M. Bacillus probiotics Food Microbiol 28 2011 214 220 10.1016/j.fm.2010.03.007 21315976
2 Nithya V. Murthy P.S. Halami P.M. Development and application of active films for food packaging using antibacterial peptide of Bacillus licheniformis Me1 J Appl Microbiol 115 2013 475 483 10.1111/jam.12258 23683094
3 Muras A. Romero M. Mayer C. Otero A. Biotechnological applications of Bacillus licheniformis Crit Rev Biotechnol 41 2021 609 627 10.1080/07388551.2021.1873239 33593221
4 Cui T.B. Chai H.Y. Jiang L.X. Isolation and partial characterization of an antifungal protein produced by Bacillus licheniformis BS-3 Molecules 17 2012 7336 7347 10.3390/molecules17067336 22699567
5 Li K. Cai D. Wang Z. He Z. Chen S. Development of an efficient genome editing tool in Bacillus licheniformis using CRISPR-cas9 nickase Appl Environ Microbiol 84 2018 10.1128/AEM.02608-17
6 Hertel R. Volland S. Liesegang H. Conjugative reporter system for the use in Bacillus licheniformis and closely related Bacilli Lett Appl Microbiol 60 2015 162 167 10.1111/lam.12352 25363901
7 Wang Y. Bacillus subtilis genome editing using ssDNA with short homology regions Nucleic Acids Res 40 2012 e91 10.1093/nar/gks248
8 Li Y. Efficient genome editing in Bacillus licheniformis mediated by a conditional CRISPR/Cas9 system Microorganisms 8 2020 10.3390/microorganisms8050754
9 Xue F. Construction of a bacteriophage-derived recombinase system in Bacillus licheniformis for gene deletion Amb Express 13 2023 89 10.1186/s13568-023-01589-w 37633871
10 Song Y. Development and application of CRISPR-based genetic tools in Bacillus species and Bacillus phages J Appl Microbiol 133 2022 2280 2298 10.1111/jam.15704 35797344
11 Mao X. High level production of diacetylchitobiose deacetylase by refactoring genetic elements and cellular metabolism Bioresour Technol 341 2021 125836 10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125836
12 Zetsche B. Cpf1 is a single RNA-guided endonuclease of a class 2 CRISPR-Cas system Cell 163 2015 759 771 10.1016/j.cell.2015.09.038 26422227
13 Hao W. Design and construction of portable CRISPR-Cpf1-mediated genome editing in Bacillus subtilis 168 Oriented toward multiple utilities Front Bioeng Biotechnol 8 2020 524676 10.3389/fbioe.2020.524676
14 Zetsche B. Multiplex gene editing by CRISPR-Cpf1 using a single crRNA array Nat Biotechnol 35 2017 31 34 10.1038/nbt.3737 27918548
15 Zhou C. Development and application of a CRISPR/Cas9 system for Bacillus licheniformis genome editing Int J Biol Macromol 122 2019 329 337 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.10.170 30401651
16 Asmamaw M. Zawdie B. Mechanism and applications of CRISPR/Cas-9-Mediated genome editing Biologics 15 2021 353 361 10.2147/BTT.S326422 34456559
17 Dalvie N.C. Lorgeree T. Biedermann A.M. Love K.R. Love J.C. Simplified gene knockout by CRISPR-Cas9-induced homologous recombination ACS Synth Biol 11 2022 497 501 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00194 34882409
18 Jiang Y. CRISPR-Cpf1 assisted genome editing of Corynebacterium glutamicum Nat Commun 8 2017 15179 10.1038/ncomms15179
19 Hu X. Meng X. Li J. Wang K. Yu H. Improving the efficiency of the CRISPR-Cas12a system with tRNA-crRNA arrays The Crop J 8 2020 403 407 10.1016/j.cj.2019.06.007
20 Liang D. CRISPR/LbCas12a-Mediated genome editing in Soybean Methods Mol Biol 2653 2023 39 52 10.1007/978-1-0716-3131-7_3 36995618
21 Li P. Cas12a mediates efficient and precise endogenous gene tagging via MITI: microhomology-dependent targeted integrations Cell Mol Life Sci 77 2020 3875 3884 10.1007/s00018-019-03396-8 31848638
22 Zhao Y. Boeke J.D. CRISPR-Cas12a system in fission yeast for multiplex genomic editing and CRISPR interference Nucleic Acids Res 48 2020 5788 5798 10.1093/nar/gkaa329 32374858
23 Lee H.J. Kim H.J. Park Y.J. Lee S.J. Efficient single-Nucleotide microbial genome editing achieved using CRISPR/Cpf1 with Maximally 3'-end-Truncated crRNAs ACS Synth Biol 11 2022 2134 2143 10.1021/acssynbio.2c00054 35584409
24 Zhang J. Hong W. Zong W. Wang P. Wang Y. Markerless genome editing in Clostridium beijerinckii using the CRISPR-Cpf1 system J Biotechnol 284 2018 27 30 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2018.07.040 30081040
25 Wu Y. Efficient protein expression and Biosynthetic gene Cluster regulation in Bacillus subtilis driven by a T7-BOOST system ACS Synth Biol 12 2023 3328 3339 10.1021/acssynbio.3c00331 37885173
26 Xiao F. Construction of a novel sugar alcohol-inducible expression system in Bacillus licheniformis Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 104 2020 5409 5425 10.1007/s00253-020-10618-8 32333054
27 Gensini G.F. Binding of low-molecular-weight heparin to aortic endothelium in rabbits Haemostasis 14 1984 466 472 10.1159/000215107 6534819
28 Zhihua L. Xiang L. Jingnan Z. Heterologous expression of maltotetraose-forming amylase from Pseudomonas saccharophila in Bacillus licheniformis Food Ferment Ind 2021 50 54
29 Ming-Ming Y. Wei-Wei Z. Xi-Feng Z. Pei-Lin C. Construction and characterization of a novel maltose inducible expression vector in Bacillus subtilis Biotechnol Lett 28 2006 1713 1718 10.1007/s10529-006-9146-z 17001500
30 Xiao F. A new CcpA binding site plays a bidirectional role in carbon catabolism in Bacillus licheniformis iScience 24 2021 102400 10.1016/j.isci.2021.102400
31 Wu S.C. Functional production and characterization of a fibrin-specific single-chain antibody fragment from Bacillus subtilis: effects of molecular chaperones and a wall-bound protease on antibody fragment production Appl Environ Microbiol 68 2002 3261 3269 10.1128/AEM.68.7.3261-3269.2002 12089002
32 Yazici S.Ö. Özmen İ. Effect of the Crude Saponin extract from Gypsophila pilulifera Boiss. & Heldr. On protease from Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6633 and Antioxidant properties of the extract Iran J Sci Technol Trans A-Science 42 2017 1707 1713 10.1007/s40995-017-0366-y
33 Langa S. Peiroten A. Arques J.L. Landete J.M. Evoglow-Pp1 and mCherry proteins: a dual fluorescent labeling system for lactic acid bacteria Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 105 2021 7367 7378 10.1007/s00253-021-11537-y 34536099
34 Berkner S. Wlodkowski A. Albers S.V. Lipps G. Inducible and constitutive promoters for genetic systems in Sulfolobus acidocaldarius Extremophiles 14 2010 249 259 10.1007/s00792-010-0304-9 20221889
35 Yue J. Fu G. Zhang D. Wen J. A new maltose-inducible high-performance heterologous expression system in Bacillus subtilis Biotechnol Lett 39 2017 1237 1244 10.1007/s10529-017-2357-7 28527120
36 Rey M.W. Complete genome sequence of the industrial bacterium Bacillus licheniformis and comparisons with closely related Bacillus species Genome Biol 5 2004 R77 10.1186/gb-2004-5-10-r77 15461803
37 Postma E. Verduyn C. Kuiper A. Scheffers W.A. van Dijken J.P. Substrate-accelerated death of Saccharomyces cerevisiae CBS 8066 under maltose stress Yeast 6 1990 149 158 10.1002/yea.320060209 2183522
38 Zhang X.H. Nijland J.G. Driessen A.J.M. Maltose accumulation-induced cell death in Saccharomyces cerevisiae FEMS Yeast Res 24 2024 10.1093/femsyr/foae012
39 Yang Y. Wang D. Lu P. Ma S. Chen K. Research progress on nucleic acid detection and genome editing of CRISPR/Cas12 system Mol Biol Rep 50 2023 3723 3738 10.1007/s11033-023-08240-8 36648696
40 Song C.W. Rathnasingh C. Song H. CRISPR-Cas9 mediated metabolic engineering of a mucoid Bacillus licheniformis isolate for mass production of 2,3-butanediol Biochem Eng J 175 2021 10.1016/j.bej.2021.108141
41 Zhang K. Su L. Wu J. Recent advances in recombinant protein production by Bacillus subtilis Annu Rev Food Sci Technol 11 2020 295 318 10.1146/annurev-food-032519-051750 31905010
42 Zou W. Edros R. Al-Rubeai M. The relationship of metabolic burden to productivity levels in CHO cell lines Biotechnol Appl Biochem 65 2018 173 180 10.1002/bab.1574 28681393
43 Reuss D.R. Large-scale reduction of the Bacillus subtilis genome: consequences for the transcriptional network, resource allocation, and metabolism Genome Res 27 2017 289 299 10.1101/gr.215293.116 27965289
44 Li Z. Development and verification of an FLP/FRT system for gene editing in Bacillus licheniformis Sheng Wu Gong Cheng Xue Bao 35 2019 458 471 10.13345/j.cjb.180327 30912354
45 Krishnappa L. Extracytoplasmic proteases determining the cleavage and release of secreted proteins, lipoproteins, and membrane proteins in Bacillus subtilis J Proteome Res 12 2013 4101 4110 10.1021/pr400433h 23937099
46 Harwood C.R. Kikuchi Y. The ins and outs of Bacillus proteases: activities, functions and commercial significance FEMS Microbiol Rev 46 2022 10.1093/femsre/fuab046
47 Pohl S. Harwood C.R. Heterologous protein secretion by bacillus species from the cradle to the grave Adv Appl Microbiol 73 2010 1 25 10.1016/S0065-2164(10)73001-X 20800757
48 Bhatia S. Pooja & Yadav S.K. CRISPR-Cas for genome editing: classification, mechanism, designing and applications Int J Biol Macromol 238 2023 124054 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.124054
49 Wu Y. CAMERS-B: CRISPR/Cpf1 assisted multiple-genes editing and regulation system for Bacillus subtilis Biotechnol Bioeng 117 2020 1817 1825 10.1002/bit.27322 32129468
50 Zhang X. A novel and efficient genome editing tool assisted by CRISPR-Cas12a/Cpf1 for Pichia pastoris ACS Synth Biol 10 2021 2927 2937 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00172 34644057
51 Rao Y. Construction and characterization of a Gradient strength promoter Library for Fine-Tuned gene expression in Bacillus licheniformis ACS Synth Biol 10 2021 2331 2339 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00242 34449215
52 Zhang K. Su L. Duan X. Liu L. Wu J. High-level extracellular protein production in Bacillus subtilis using an optimized dual-promoter expression system Microb Cell Factories 16 2017 32 10.1186/s12934-017-0649-1
53 Trung N.T. An auto-inducible phosphate-controlled expression system of Bacillus licheniformis BMC Biotechnol 19 2019 3 10.1186/s12896-018-0490-6 30626366
54 Rados T. Andre K. Cerletti M. Bisson A. A sweet new set of inducible and constitutive promoters in Haloferax volcanii Front Microbiol 14 2023 1204876 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1204876
55 Ying Q. Secreted expression of a hyperthermophilic alpha-amylase gene from Thermococcus sp. HJ21 in Bacillus subtilis J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol 22 2012 392 398 10.1159/000346215 23486110
56 Jiang Y. Fu Y. Ren Z. Gou H. Xu C. Screening and application of inducible promoters in Ruminiclostridium papyrosolvens Lett Appl Microbiol 71 2020 428 436 10.1111/lam.13352 32649779
57 Chen J. High-level intra- and extra-cellular production of D-psicose 3-epimerase via a modified xylose-inducible expression system in Bacillus subtilis J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 43 2016 1577 1591 10.1007/s10295-016-1819-6 27544767
58 Hu J.H. Wang F. Liu C.Z. Development of an efficient process intensification strategy for enhancing Pfu DNA polymerase production in recombinant Escherichia coli Bioproc Biosyst Eng 38 2015 651 659 10.1007/s00449-014-1304-4
59 Wang Y. Setlow P. Brul S. Genomic versus plasmid-borne expression of Germinant Receptor proteins in Bacillus cereus strain 14579 Microorganisms 10 2022 10.3390/microorganisms10091774
60 Oktem A. Pranoto D.A. van Dijl J.M. Post-translational secretion stress regulation in Bacillus subtilis is controlled by intra- and extracellular proteases Nat Biotechnol 79 2024 71 81 10.1016/j.nbt.2023.12.009
61 Burnett T.J. Shankweiler G.W. Hageman J.H. Activation of intracellular serine proteinase in Bacillus subtilis cells during sporulation J Bacteriol 165 1986 139 145 10.1128/jb.165.1.139-145.1986 3079745
62 Vasantha N. Thompson L.D. Secretion of a heterologous protein from Bacillus subtilis with the aid of protease signal sequences J Bacteriol 165 1986 837 842 10.1128/jb.165.3.837-842.1986 3081490
63 Sloma A. Bacillopeptidase F of Bacillus subtilis: purification of the protein and cloning of the gene J Bacteriol 172 1990 1470 1477 10.1128/jb.172.3.1470-1477.1990 2106512
64 Sloma A. Ally A. Ally D. Pero J. Gene encoding a minor extracellular protease in Bacillus subtilis J Bacteriol 170 1988 5557 5563 10.1128/jb.170.12.5557-5563.1988 3142851
65 Foophow T. Sittipol D. Rukying N. Phoohinkong W. Jongruja N. Purification and characterization of a novel extracellular Haloprotease vpr from Bacillus licheniformis strain KB111 Food Technol Biotechnol 60 2022 225 236 10.17113/ftb.60.02.22.7301 35910276
66 Babe L.M. Schmidt B. Purification and biochemical analysis of WprA, a 52-kDa serine protease secreted by B. subtilis as an active complex with its 23-kDa propeptide Biochim Biophys Acta 1386 1998 211 219 10.1016/s0167-4838(98)00110-1 9675284
67 Rufo G.A. Jr. Sullivan B.J. Sloma A. Pero J. Isolation and characterization of a novel extracellular metalloprotease from Bacillus subtilis J Bacteriol 172 1990 1019 1023 10.1128/jb.172.2.1019-1023.1990 2105290
68 Tran L. Wu X.C. Wong S.L. Cloning and expression of a novel protease gene encoding an extracellular neutral protease from Bacillus subtilis J Bacteriol 173 1991 6364 6372 10.1128/jb.173.20.6364-6372.1991 1917867
69 Kawamura F. Doi R.H. Construction of a Bacillus subtilis double mutant deficient in extracellular alkaline and neutral proteases J Bacteriol 160 1984 442 444 10.1128/jb.160.1.442-444.1984 6434524
70 Wu X.C. Lee W. Tran L. Wong S.L. Engineering a Bacillus subtilis expression-secretion system with a strain deficient in six extracellular proteases J Bacteriol 173 1991 4952 4958 10.1128/jb.173.16.4952-4958.1991 1907264
71 Gu Z. High-efficiency heterologous expression of nattokinase based on a combinatorial strategy Process Biochem 133 2023 65 74 10.1016/j.procbio.2023.08.008
72 Chen P.T. Chiang C.J. Chao Y.P. Medium optimization for the production of recombinant nattokinase by Bacillus subtilis using response surface methodology Biotechnol Prog 23 2007 1327 1332 10.1021/bp070109b 17914859
73 Yang S. Huang Y.H. Huang X.D. Li S.Y. Yuan Z.Y. High expression of penicilling acylase gene from bacillus megaterium in Bacillus subtilis Acta Biochim Biophys Sin 31 1999 601 603 12114980
74 Jeong K.J. Park I.Y. Kim M.S. Kim S.C. High-level expression of an endoxylanase gene from Bacillus sp. in Bacillus subtilis DB104 for the production of xylobiose from xylan Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 50 1998 113 118 10.1007/s002530051264 9720207
75 Gong J.S. Efficient keratinase expression via promoter engineering strategies for degradation of feather wastes Enzym Microb Technol 137 2020 109550 10.1016/j.enzmictec.2020.109550
76 Zhang W. Enhancement of the d-allulose 3-epimerase expression in Bacillus subtilis through both transcriptional and translational regulations J Agric Food Chem 72 2024 8052 8059 10.1021/acs.jafc.4c01122 38563420
77 Ji S. Efficient biosynthesis of a Cecropin A-melittin mutant in Bacillus subtilis WB700 Sci Rep 7 2017 40587 10.1038/srep40587
