Engineered living conductive biofilms as functional materials

Bird, Lina J.; Onderko, Elizabeth L.; Phillips, Daniel A.; Mickol, R. L.; Malanoski, Anthony P.; Yates, Matthew D.; Eddie, Brian J.; Glaven, Sarah M.

doi:10.1557/mrc.2019.27

Cited by 36 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 105 publications

(126 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite this effort, uncertainty over the conduction mechanism remains. One particularly controversial point is whether extracellular cytochromes are necessary to enable longrange extracellular electron transfer, [32][33][34][35] or whether, as evidence suggests, aromatic residue rich pili alone can facilitate electronic conduction. [18,[36][37][38][39][40] Dissimilar experimental conditions such as the state of the material and surrounding environment have been highlighted as possible culprits.…”

Section: Challenges In Characterizing Conductive Protein Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges in engineering conductive protein fibres: Disentangling the knowledge

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conductive protein materials are promising candidates for next‐generation bioelectronics due to their genetically‐customizable functionalities, biocompatibility, and bioactivity. We envision that they could be used in a variety of bio‐friendly functional devices, including bio‐electronic interfaces, bio‐energy devices, and sensors. However, their practical uses are limited by gaps in our understanding of charge transport in proteins, and by challenges in establishing reliable data collection methods. Moreover, characterization protocols are not always designed with applications in mind, which hinders engineering developments. Here, we review the effects of sample preparation, environmental conditions (ie, hydration level, pH, temperature), measurement scale (nano, micro, and macro), and geometrical considerations, on the measured electrical properties of proteins. We emphasize the need for standardized methods and collaborations across fields for the design of conductive protein materials, keeping in mind their end goal applications. Our objective for this review is to disentangle the knowledge on protein conductivity, and to clarify the current challenges, limitations, and future possibilities for these biological conductors.

show abstract

Section: Challenges In Characterizing Conductive Protein Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges in engineering conductive protein fibres: Disentangling the knowledge

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To test the effect of expressing BdpA in an organism with no predicted BAR domain-containing proteins and no apparent OME production, BdpA was expressed in Marinobacter atlanticus CP1 60 . Marinobacter and Shewanella are of the same phylogenetic order (Alteromonadales) and have been used for heterologous expression of other S. oneidensis proteins, such as MtrCAB 61,62 . Upon exposure to DAPG, M. atlanticus containing the p452- bdpA construct (CP1 p452- bdpA ) form membrane extensions (Figure 4).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Prokaryotic Membrane Sculpting BAR Domain Protein

Phillips

Zacharoff

Hampton

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Paragraph1 Bin/Amphiphysin/RVS (BAR) domain proteins belong to a ubiquitous superfamily 2 of coiled-coil proteins that influence membrane curvature in eukaryotes and are 3 associated with vesicle biogenesis, vesicle-mediated protein trafficking, and intracellular 4 signaling 1-6 . BAR domain proteins have not been identified in bacteria, despite certain 5 organisms displaying an array of membrane curvature phenotypes [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] . Here we identify 6 a prokaryotic BAR domain protein, BdpA, from Shewanella oneidensis MR-1, an iron 7 reducing bacterium known to produce redox active membrane vesicles and micrometer-8 scale membrane extensions. BdpA is required for uniform size distribution of outer 9 membrane vesicles and is responsible for scaffolding outer membrane extensions 10 (OMEs) into membrane structures with consistent diameter and curvature. While a strain 11 lacking BdpA produces OMEs, cryogenic transmission electron microscopy reveals more 12 lobed, disordered OMEs rather than the membrane tubes produced by the wild type 13 strain. Overexpression of BdpA promotes OME formation even during planktonic 14 conditions where S. oneidensis OMEs are less common. Heterologous expression also 15 results in OME production in Marinobacter atlanticus CP1 and Escherichia coli. Based 16 on the ability of BdpA to alter membrane curvature in vivo, we propose that BdpA and its 17 homologs comprise a newly identified class of prokaryotic BAR (P-BAR) domains that will 18 aid in identification of putative P-BAR proteins in other bacterial species.curved surface of the antiparallel coiled-coil protein dimers [17][18][19][20] . Some BAR domain- 24containing proteins, such as the N-BAR protein BIN1, contain amphipathic helical wedges 25 that insert into the outer membrane leaflet and can assist in membrane binding 21 . Other 26BAR domains can be accompanied by a membrane targeting domain, such as PX for 27 phosphoinositide binding 22,23 , in order to direct membrane curvature formation at specific 28 sites, as is the case with sorting nexin BAR proteins 4 . The extent of accumulation of BAR 29 domain proteins at a specific site can influence the degree of the resultant membrane 30 curvature 24 , and tubulation events arise as a consequence of BAR domain 31 multimerization in conjunction with lipid binding 25 . Interactions between BAR domain 32 proteins and membranes resolve membrane tension, promote membrane stability, and 33 aid in localizing cellular processes, such as actin binding, signaling through small 34 GTPases, membrane vesicle scission, and vesicular transport of proteins 1,26,27 . Despite 35 our knowledge of numerous eukaryotic BAR proteins spanning a variety of modes of 36 curvature formation, membrane localizations, and subtypes (N-BAR, F-BAR, and I-BAR), 37 characterization of a functional prokaryotic BAR domain protein has yet to be reported. 38 Bacterial cell membrane curvature can be observed during the formation of outer 39 membrane vesicles (OMV) and outer membrane extensions (OME)....

show abstract

“…The use of synthetic biology tools and platforms to improve MFCs and MES will also help grow areas of electromicrobiology and microbial electrochemical technologies that are just beginning to arise. Efforts to develop electrical reporting devices have continued to improve (Jensen et al ., , ; Goldbeck et al ., ; West et al ., ) and are now moving from E. coli to organisms tolerant to conditions outside of the laboratory (Bird et al ., ). Synthetic biology is being used to allow for faster reporting using EET pathways by refactoring split ferredoxins as switchable gates for electrons (Atkinson et al ., ).…”

Section: Engineered Conductive Materials and Bioelectronic Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 97%