2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.fgb.2008.07.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Expression of the transporter encoded by the cefT gene of Acremonium chrysogenum increases cephalosporin production in Penicillium chrysogenum

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
22
1
3

Year Published

2009
2009
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
1
22
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…This is probably because that this strain has been already undergone several rounds of mutagenesis and the copy number of cefT has already been increased. Unlike a recent publication [24] that demonstrated cefT had a clearly positive effect on CPC production, our result showed that cefT was not a limiting factor in high CPC producer because strain 84-3-87 has a much higher original CPC yield than C10. Comparing transformants bearing pYG858 and pYG877, there is no significant improvement in CPC production when cefEF gene was introduced.…”
contrasting
confidence: 99%
“…This is probably because that this strain has been already undergone several rounds of mutagenesis and the copy number of cefT has already been increased. Unlike a recent publication [24] that demonstrated cefT had a clearly positive effect on CPC production, our result showed that cefT was not a limiting factor in high CPC producer because strain 84-3-87 has a much higher original CPC yield than C10. Comparing transformants bearing pYG858 and pYG877, there is no significant improvement in CPC production when cefEF gene was introduced.…”
contrasting
confidence: 99%
“…Digested DNA fragments were separated on a 0.8 % agarose gel, blotted onto a Zeta-Probe membrane (Biorad) as described earlier [26], and hybridized with the indicated DIG labeled probes.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Southern blotting was carried out by digesting gDNA (5 µg) with the indicated restriction enzymes. Digested DNA fragments were separated on a 0.8% agarose gel and blotted onto a Zeta-Probe membrane (Biorad) described earlier [27], and hybridized with the indicated probes that were DIG labeled.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%