Enzyme reactions, both in Nature and technical applications, commonly occur at the interface of immiscible phases. Nevertheless, stringent descriptions of interfacial enzyme catalysis remain sparse, and this is partly due to a shortage of coherent experimental data to guide and assess such work. In this work, we produced and kinetically characterized 83 cellulases, which revealed a conspicuous linear free energy relationship (LFER) between the substrate binding strength and the activation barrier. The scaling occurred despite the investigated enzymes being structurally and mechanistically diverse. We suggest that the scaling reflects basic physical restrictions of the hydrolytic process and that evolutionary selection has condensed cellulase phenotypes near the line. One consequence of the LFER is that the activity of a cellulase can be estimated from its substrate binding strength, irrespectively of structural and mechanistic details, and this appears promising for in silico selection and design within this industrially important group of enzymes.

Synergy between cellulolytic enzymes is essential in both natural and industrial breakdown of biomass. In addition to synergy between endo- and exo-lytic enzymes, a lesser known but equally conspicuous synergy occurs among exo-acting, processive cellobiohydrolases (CBHs) such as Cel7A and Cel6A from Hypocrea jecorina. We studied this system using microcrystalline cellulose as substrate and found a degree of synergy between 1.3 and 2.2 depending on the experimental conditions. Synergy between enzyme variants without the carbohydrate binding module (CBM) and its linker was strongly reduced compared to the wild types. One plausible interpretation of this is that exo-exo synergy depends on the targeting role of the CBM. Many earlier works have proposed that exo-exo synergy was caused by an auxiliary endo-lytic activity of Cel6A. However, biochemical data from different assays suggested that the endo-lytic activity of both Cel6A and Cel7A were 10 -10 times lower than the common endoglucanase, Cel7B, from the same organism. Moreover, the endo-lytic activity of Cel7A was 2-3-fold higher than for Cel6A, and we suggest that endo-like activity of Cel6A cannot be the main cause for the observed synergy. Rather, we suggest the exo-exo synergy found here depends on different specificities of the enzymes possibly governed by their CBMs. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2017;114: 1639-1647. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The cellobiohydrolase (CBH) Cel6A is an important component of enzyme cocktails for industrial degradation of lignocellulosic biomass. However, the kinetics of this enzyme acting on its natural, insoluble substrate remains sparsely investigated. Here, we studied Cel6A from Trichoderma reesei with respect to adsorption, processivity, and kinetics both in the steady‐state and pre‐steady‐state regimes, on microcrystalline and amorphous cellulose. We found that slow dissociation (koff) was limiting the overall reaction rate, and we suggest that this leads to an accumulation of catalytically inactive complexes in front of obstacles and irregularities on the cellulose surface. The processivity number of Cel6A was low on both investigated substrates (5–10), and this suggested a rugged surface with short obstacle‐free path lengths. The turnover of the inner catalytic cycle (the reactions of catalysis in one processive step) was too fast to be fully resolved, but a minimum value of about 20 s−1 could be established. This is among the highest values reported hitherto for a cellulase, and it underscores the catalytic efficiency of Cel6A. Conversely, we found that Cel6A had a poor ability to recognize attack sites on the cellulose surface. On amorphous cellulose, for example, Cel6A was only able to initiate hydrolysis on about 4% of the sites to which it could adsorb. This probably reflects high requirements of Cel6A to the architecture of the site. We conclude that compared to the other CBH, Cel7A, secreted by T. reesei, Cel6A is catalytically more efficient but less capable of attacking a broad range of structurally distinct sites on the cellulose surface. Enzymes TrCel6A, nonreducing end‐acting cellobiohydrolase (http://www.chem.qmul.ac.uk/iubmb/enzyme/EC3/2/1/91.html) from Trichoderma reesei; TrCel7A, reducing end‐acting cellobiohydrolase (http://www.chem.qmul.ac.uk/iubmb/enzyme/EC3/2/1/176.html) from T. reesei.

Cellulose degrading fungi such as Hypocrea jecorina secrete several cellulases including the two cellobiohydrolases (CBHs) Cel6A and Cel7A. The two CBHs differ in catalytic mechanism, attack different ends, belong to different families, but are both processive multi-domain enzymes that are essential in the hydrolysis of cellulose. Here we present a direct kinetic comparison of these two enzymes acting on insoluble cellulose. We used both continuous- and end-point assays under either enzyme- or substrate excess, and found distinct kinetic differences between the two CBHs. Cel6A was catalytically superior with a maximal rate over four times higher than Cel7A. Conversely, the ability of Cel6A to attack diverse structures on the cellulose surface was inferior to Cel7A. This latter difference was pronounced as the density of attack sites for Cel7A was almost an order of magnitude higher compared to Cel6A. We conclude that Cel6A is a fast but selective enzyme and that Cel7A is slower, but promiscuous. One consequence of this is that Cel6A is more effective when substrate is plentiful, while Cel7A excels when substrate is limiting. These diverse kinetic properties of Cel6A and Cel7A might elucidate why both cellobiohydrolases are prominent in cellulolytic degrading fungi.

Cellobiohydrolases (CBHs) from glycoside hydrolase family 6 (GH6) make up an important part of the secretome in many cellulolytic fungi. They are also of technical interest, particularly because they are part of the enzyme cocktails that are used for the industrial breakdown of lignocellulosic biomass. Nevertheless, functional studies of GH6 CBHs are scarce and focused on a few model enzymes. To elucidate functional breadth among GH6 CBHs, we conducted a comparative biochemical study of seven GH6 CBHs originating from fungi living in different habitats, in addition to one enzyme variant. The enzyme sequences were investigated by phylogenetic analyses to ensure that they were not closely related phylogenetically. The selected enzymes were all heterologously expressed in Aspergillus oryzae, purified and thoroughly characterized biochemically. This approach allowed direct comparisons of functional data, and the results revealed substantial variability. For example, the adsorption capacity on cellulose spanned two orders of magnitude and kinetic parameters, derived from two independent steady-state methods also varied significantly. While the different functional parameters covered wide ranges, they were not independent since they changed in parallel between two poles. One pole was characterized by strong substrate interactions, high adsorption capacity and low turnover number while the other showed weak substrate interactions, poor adsorption and high turnover. The investigated enzymes essentially defined a continuum between these two opposites, and this scaling of functional parameters raises interesting questions regarding functional plasticity and evolution of GH6 CBHs.