US20160153009A1

US20160153009A1 - Method of Modifying a Yeast Cell for the Production of Ethanol

Info

Publication number: US20160153009A1
Application number: US14/856,308
Authority: US
Inventors: Elke Nevoigt; Stephane Guillouet; Carine Bideaux; Sandrine Alfenore; Georg Hubmann
Original assignee: Danisco US Inc
Current assignee: Danisco US Inc
Priority date: 2007-10-29
Filing date: 2015-09-16
Publication date: 2016-06-02
Also published as: EP2222860A1; EP2222860B8; US9175270B2; WO2009056984A1; EP2060632A1; EP2222860B1; US20120295319A1; BRPI0817154B1; BRPI0817154B8; ES2521316T3; BRPI0817154A2; CA2703856A1

Abstract

The invention relates to a method of modifying a yeast cell for the production of ethanol. According to some embodiments of the invention, the activity of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein is reduced.

Description

The invention pertains to a method of modifying a yeast cell, in particular for the production of ethanol. The invention furthermore pertains to a method for producing ethanol from biomass.
Bio-ethanol is a promising alternative to fossil fuels. The increasing interest in renewable biofuels mainly results from the fact that world fossil fuels are limited. Moreover, there is the tendency to decrease the dependency of importing oil. The European Commission has planned to progressively substitute 20% of conventional fossil fuels by alternative fuels in the transport sector by 2020 (5.75% by 2010). One technical pathway is to produce bio-ethanol via microbial fermentation from various domestic crops (biomass).
Bio-ethanol production from sugar and starch containing biomass is common in Brazil and the United States. The yeast Saccharomyces (S.) cerevisiae has been traditionally used in this process. In fact, the yeast S. cerevisiae has outstanding properties for bio-ethanol production. In particular, its high tolerance to the conditions which occur during industrial ethanol production will hardly allow other microorganisms to displace yeast in this field.
Glycerol is formed by S. cerevisiae as a by-product during glucose catabolism beside the main fermentation products: ethanol, carbon dioxide and biomass. The carbon flux towards glycerol is quite substantial and can amount up to 0.1 g glycerol per gram glucose (Alfenore et al., 2004; Aldiguier et al., 2004).
Glycerol biosynthesis from the glycolytic intermediate dihydroxyacetone phosphate (DHAP) in S. cerevisiae is performed by two enzymatic steps catalyzed by the glycerol 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GPDH) and the glycerol 3-phosphatase (GPP) (see also FIG. 1). Each enzyme is encoded by two isogenes GPD1/GPD2 and GPP1/GPP2, respectively.
Glycerol biosynthesis has essential roles in S. cerevisiae. One of the most important functions is maintaining cytosolic redox balance, especially under anaerobic conditions, and probably also under aerobic conditions when sugar concentration is high (Crabtree effect) (Ansell et al., 1997; Bakker et al., 2001; Rigoulet et al., 2004; Valadi et al., 2004). The glycerol biosynthetic pathway is also involved in the biosynthesis of glycerophospholipids and triacylglycerols which are formed from L-glycerol 3-phosphate (Kohlwein et al., 1996; Mullner and Daum, 2004). In addition, intracellular glycerol is involved in osmoadaptation (Hohmann, 2002), oxidative stress protection (Pahlman et al., 2001), and response to heat shock (Siderius et al., 2000). Responses to elevated temperatures and high osmolarity involve several signaling pathways including the protein kinase C pathway and the HOG pathway, which regulate intracellular levels of glycerol (Hohmann, 2002; Wojda et al., 2003).
In theory, the redirection of carbon flux in S. cerevisiae towards the ethanol synthetic pathway by eliminating glycerol formation could increase the ethanol yield by at least 10%. Moreover, reduction of glycerol in the fermentation broth would lead to a decrease in ethanol extraction costs as glycerol has caused problems in the distillation units and separation processes after the fermentation stage. In addition, waste volumes would be reduced. Under practical aspects, however, reducing glycerol formation without negatively affecting the cells' fitness is extremely challenging due to the various biological functions of the glycerol biosynthetic pathway, as will now be outlined with reference to previous studies.
The first metabolic engineering approach to reduce glycerol was reported a few years ago (Nissen et al., 2000a). Ethanol yield in aerobic batch fermentations was increased by 12% when glycerol formation was completely abolished by deleting GPD1 and GPD2. Growth of this double mutant was severely affected even in the presence of oxygen. Therefore, the volumetric ethanol productivity obtained with this approach was far from industrial relevance. The fact that the growth of the gpd1Δ gpd2Δ double mutant was strongly impaired has been explained by a limited capacity of respiratory NADH reoxidation (by the external NADH dehydrogenases Nde1p, Nde2p and the mitochondrial L-G3P/DHAP shuttle) (Nissen et al., 2000a) which are the only pathways for reoxidizing excess cytosolic NADH when GPD is absent.
Other attempts to reduce glycerol formation relied on the introduction of bacterial transhydrogenases into yeast. These approaches failed since, on one hand, the Azotobacter vinelandii transhydogenase produced the opposite expected effect (Nissen et al., 2001), and on the other hand, the membrane-bound transhydrogenase from Escherichia coli remained localized in the membrane of the endoplasmic reticulum (Anderlund et al., 1999).
A quite successful strategy to improve ethanol yield has been the metabolic engineering of the ammonium assimilation, reducing the NADH production during amino acid biosynthesis (Nissen et al., 2000b). The glycerol yield was reduced by 38% and the ethanol yield increased by 10%. However, for proper function, this approach requires that yeast utilizes ammonium as a source of nitrogen. Industrial media often contain amino acids, a fact which will considerably reduce the success of this approach under industrial relevant conditions.
Recently, an in silico study was carried out using a genome-scale S. cerevisiae metabolic model in order to evaluate possible metabolic engineering strategies to improve ethanol yield in S. cerevisiae (Bro et al., 2005). These approaches have been designed to prevent the production of excess NADH through biomass synthesis, and hence, reduce the need to produce glycerol. Based on authors' predictions, several approaches should be able to increase ethanol yield by up to 10.4%. One of the predicted strategies was tested in vivo, but in contrast to theory, only resulted in a 3% increase of ethanol yield.
Therefore, the metabolic engineering approaches mentioned above have no or only marginal impact on ethanol productivity under industrially relevant conditions due to the limitations in ethanol yield, growth or medium dependency. Moreover, it remains questionable if the current and predicted approaches would prove successful under high ethanol and thermal stress of industrial fermentations as they do not take into account the cells' need for intracellular glycerol.

DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The problem underlying the present invention therefore was to increase the conversion yield from fermentable biomass constituents into ethanol by yeast and, in effect, to increase the economic efficiency of bio-ethanol plants. One way to solve this goal is to reduce the production of the by-product glycerol.
A particular challenge in solving this problem lies in the fact that the complete elimination of glycerol formation has proven to be unsuccessful, as the glycerol biosynthetic pathway has several important functions for cell growth and stress tolerance. Instead, the inventors surprisingly found a strategy for modifying a wild type yeast cell that leads to an increased yield of ethanol from sugars, i.e. fermentable sugars present in hydrolysates of plant biomass, but at the same time does not have a negative influence on the growth rate of the yeast cells or the biomass yield. According to the invention, this is achieved by reducing (but not eliminating) the activity of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein when compared to the activity of these proteins in a wild-type cell.
In effect, a higher ethanol yield, titer and specific productivity compared to the isogenic wild-type strain is achieved through the invention. Also, the metabolic pathway modification has the additional advantage to lower the costs for product recovery and reduces waste volumes.
The term “reducing the activity” is meant not to include the elimination of the activity of the protein. Moreover, the term “activity” refers to the in vivo metabolic flux through the particular protein, which, according to the definition of the term “reducing the activity” is not meant to include the complete blockage of this metabolic flux. Instead, the crux of the invention lies in the reduction of the activity of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein, but at the same time providing a minimum activity of Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein in order to allow for the production of substances downstream of these enzymes (such as glycerol) that are necessary to maintain a normal growth rate.
This result can be achieved in different ways: First, it is possible to reduce the activity of the Gpd1 protein and to eliminate the activity of the Gpd2 protein. Secondly, the activity of the Gpd1 protein can be eliminated and the activity of the Gpd2 protein can be reduced. Thirdly, the activity of both the Gpd1 protein and the Gpd2 protein can be reduced. Which of the three options leads to best results depending e.g. on the type of yeast strain used or the growth conditions can be determined by a person of skill in the art without undue burden.
The yeast cells according to the invention are useful for any application in which the production of glycerol in the cell needs to be minimized to a level that does not negatively influence the growth rate of the cell.
The reduction of the activity of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein can be achieved in several ways that will now be outlined (under a) to e)). It lies within the inventive concept that one or a combination of the given possibilities can be used for a reduction in protein activity.
a) One way is to reduce the expression of the GPD1 gene and/or the GPD2 gene, which leads to a reduction of the protein in the cell.
This can be achieved in one embodiment of the invention by expressing the GPD1 gene and/or the GPD2 gene by a weak promoter that is operably linked to the GPD1 gene and/or operably linked to the GPD2 gene. A promoter is weak when the transcription rate of the gene is reduced to at least 20% or 15%, preferably to at least 10%, most preferably to at least 7% or 5% of the transcription rate of that gene expressed under the TEF1 wild type promoter (SEQ ID NO 11). Ways of measuring the strength of a promoter are known to a person of skill in the art, such as using a reporter gene like luciferase or green fluorescent protein (GFP), measuring the mRNA levels, e.g. using Northern blot or real-time reverse transcriptase PCR; on the protein level by Western blotting; or through measurements of the specific enzyme activity.
It is preferred that the expression of the GPD1 gene and/or the GPD2 gene is reduced by at least 50%, at least 60%, or at least 70% compared to its expression in a wild type cell under its wild type promoter. It is of particular advantage to reduce expression by at least 80%, or at least 90%, and it is most preferred to reduce the expression by at least 95%, or at least 99%, compared to the expression of the particular gene in a wild type yeast cell, i.e. a yeast cell with a native promoter.
In a preferred embodiment, the weak promoter is a promoter according to SEQ ID NO 5 or 6. The promoter according to SEQ ID NO 5 leads to a transcription rate of 7% and the promoter according to SEQ ID NO 6 leads to a transcription rate of 16% of the transcription rate caused by the TEF1 wild type promoter (SEQ ID NO 11) (Nevoigt et al., 2006).
b) The reduction of the activity of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein can also be achieved by providing or expressing an antisense molecule, such as an RNA molecule, to the GPD1 and/or the GPD2 mRNA to impede translation of the mRNA into a protein.
It is preferred that the antisense molecule has a sequence that hybridizes with the mRNA according to SEQ ID NO 1 or 2. In another embodiment, the antisense molecule hybridizes with or is reverse complementary to any 10 to 30 bases, preferably to any 18 to 23 bases of the mRNA according to SEQ ID NO 1 or 2.
When using antisense molecules, it is generally preferred to design them against untranslated regions of the mRNA.
Another possible means of reducing the activity of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein are ribozymes, which can catalytically cleave the Gpd1 and/or the gpd2 mRNA.
Several approaches have been developed based on antisense molecules and ribozymes to regulate gene expression, such as riboswitches. Riboswitches contain aptamer domain sites comprising highly specific pockets in the 5′ untranslated region of the mRNAs that bind small molecules or ligands. Upon binding of a ligand to an aptamer site a conformational change in the RNA structure leads to a change in gene expression.
Moreover, it is possible to target transcription factors to lower the transcription rate of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein. It has, e.g. been described that overexpression of Yig 1p leads to a decreased activity of GPP (Granath et al, 2005).
c) Alternatively, the reduction of the activity of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein can also be achieved by providing or expressing a functional antagonist to the Gpd1 and/or the Gpd2 protein, that functionally inhibits the enzymatic activity of the respective protein.
d) Also, the reduction of the activity of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein can be achieved by providing or expressing a mutated form of the Gpd1 and/or the Gpd2 protein.
Such a mutant exhibits a function inhibition of the enzymatic activity that can bear a mutation in a functional domain of the protein, such as the active center or a binding or recognition domain and leads to a reduced enzymatic activity of the respective protein without abolishing its function.
e) Finally, the reduction of the activity of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein can also be achieved by providing a small inhibitory molecule for inhibiting the Gpd1 and/or the Gpd2 protein.
The amino acid sequences of the Gpd1 protein, the Gpd2 protein, the Gpp1 protein, and the Gpp2 protein from S. cerevisiae can be found as SEQ ID NO 26, 27, 28, and 29, respectively.
For other yeast species, a person of skill in the art can identify the respective amino acid sequence.
In a preferred embodiment of the method according to the invention, the Gpp1 protein and/or the Gpp2 protein, i.e. another key enzyme of the glycerol pathway, is also reduced in its activity in addition to the activity reduction of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein.
It is possible either to reduce the activity of the Gpp1 and eliminate the activity of the Gpp2 protein, to eliminate the activity of the Gpp1 and reduce the activity of the Gpp2 protein, or to reduce both the activity of the Gpp1 and of the Gpp2 protein. In addition, it is also possible to eliminate both the activity of the Gpp1 and of the Gpp2 protein in one embodiment, as will be shown in the examples.
The means that can be used for reducing the activity of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein are equivalent to the means explained above and apply in an equivalent fashion also for the activity reduction of Gpp1 and/or Gpp2, as will be realized by a person of skill in the art. Accordingly, the GPP activity can be reduced by reducing the expression of the Gpp1 and/or the Gpp2 protein, by providing an antisense molecule to the GPP1 (SEQ ID NO 3) and/or the GPP2 mRNA (SEQ ID NO 4), by providing an antagonist to the Gpp1 and/or the Gpp2 protein, by providing a mutated form of the Gpp1 protein and/or the Gpp2 protein or by providing a small inhibitory molecule such as fluoride, which has been described as an unspecific inhibitor of phosphatases, for inhibiting the Gpp1 protein and/or the Gpp2 protein. For details regarding these reduction means, reference is made to the description given above.
The present invention can generally be used with any yeast strain, such as S. cerevisiae and closely related species (i.e. other species of the genus Saccharomyces). Other Non-Saccharomyces yeast species, especially those which show ethanolic fermentation and have the ability to ferment pentoses such as Pichia (P.) stipitis, are also preferred. It is particularly preferred to use strains that are advantageous in industrial applications, such as the prototrophic S. cerevisiae yeast strain CEN.PK1I3-7D. Other suitable strains are known to a person of skill in the art.
It will be understood by a person of skill in the art that when using a diploid or polyploid 10 strain, it becomes necessary to reduce the activities of the Gpp1p and/or Gpp2p as well as possibly Gpd1p and/or Gpd2p in all of the alleles present in order to achieve the necessary reduction in protein activity.
The underlying problem is also solved by a yeast cell, in particular a genetically modified yeast cell that is obtainable through a method as described above.
Specifically, in such a yeast cell, the activity of the Gpd1p and/or Gpd2p protein is reduced in comparison to the activity of said proteins in a wild-type yeast cell, i.e. in a yeast cell with a normal protein activity (normal flux) and a normal growth rate, or, put differently, in comparison to a yeast cell in which the modifications present in the genetically modified yeast cell according to the invention that lead to the reduced activity of the Gpd1 and/or Gpd2 protein are not present.
For the preferred amount of reduction of protein activity, reference is made to the description above.
Means for reducing the activity of said proteins were described above, the application of which leads to a yeast cell in which the expression of the GPD1 gene and/or gpd2 gene is reduced,

- an antisense molecule to the GPD1 and/or gpd2 mRNA, e.g. in the form of an RNA molecule, is present,
- a functional antagonist to the Gpd1 protein and/or Gpd2 protein is present,
- a mutated form of a Gpd1 protein and/or Gpd2 protein, that is functionally inhibited is present, and/or a small inhibitory molecule for inhibiting the Gpd1 and/or the Gpd2 protein is present.

Further characteristics of such a yeast cell according to the invention were described above in relation to the method according to the invention.
The underlying problem is also solved through the use of a yeast cell, in particular a genetically modified yeast cell as describe above for producing ethanol from biomass. This can be achieved by providing a modified yeast cell as described above, providing biomass and growing the yeast cell in the presence of the biomass, as well as obtaining the ethanol. In general, the yeast cells according to the invention can be used in any application in which high glycerol production in the cell is to be avoided, since the reduction of glycerol according to the method described here does not lead to smaller growth rates.
The term biomass when used together with a method of producing ethanol, is meant to refer to plant and plant-derived materials, such as starch, sugar, cellulose, hemicellulose, in particular from sugar cane, sugar beet, corn, grain, etc.
The underlying problem is furthermore solved by a method for the production of ethanol which comprises the following steps:

- providing a yeast cell as described above,
- providing biomass, and
- growing the yeast cell in the presence of the biomass under conditions that allow for the production of ethanol.

As will be evident to a person of skill in the art, it might be necessary or advantageous to treat the biomass chemically, enzymatically or mechanically prior to growing the yeast together with the biomass in order to facilitate fermentation. Methods for such treatments are known to a person of skill in the art.
As shown by Alfenore et al., 2004, the production of glycerol can also be reduced by adapting the growth conditions of the yeast cell. Particularly the aeration conditions and the composition of the medium can have a large influence on glycerol production and therefore on ethanol production.

FIGURES

FIG. 1

The pathways involved in glycerol metabolism in Saccharomyces cerevisiae are shown. Glycerol is formed from glycolytic dihydroxyacetone phosphate (DHAP) by the action of both glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GPD encoded by GPD1 and GPD2) and glycerol-3-phosphatase (G3Pase encoded by GPP1 and GPP2). Gut1p and Gut2p are responsible for the utilization of glycerol. The pathways for biosynthesis and metabolization of glycerol in S. cerevisiae have been reviewed by Nevoigt and Stahl (1997). The Fps1p channel is the mediator of the major part of glycerol passive diffusion (Oliveira et al., 2003). Yeast cells take in glycerol via transporter Stllp and probably also via Gup1p and Gup2p (Ferreira et al., 2005). Glycerol is converted to dihydroxyacetone (DHA) by NADP+-dependent glycerol dehydro genase (GDH). The genes ARA1, GCYI, GRE3, YPR1 are suggested to contribute to this activity (Izawa et al., 2004); however, others reported that no activity of this enzyme at all is detectable, a result which has put the relevance of the DHA pathway for S. cerevisiae into question (Norbeck and Blomberg, 1997). DAK1 and DAK2 encode dihydroxyacetone kinase (Molin et al., 2003). NDE1 and NDE2 encode the external NADH dehydrogenase in yeast which is able to directly reoxidize cytosolic NADH transferring the electrons to the respiratory chain. DHAP: dihydroxyacetone phosphate, GAP: glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate, L-G3P: L-glycerol 3-phosphate, DHA: dihydroxyacetone, FBP: 1,6-fructose bisphosphate, and the TPI1: gene encoding triose phosphate isomerase

FIG. 2

FIG. 2 shows the sequence alignment of the unmutated TEF1 promoter of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and TEF1 promoter mutant 2. The normalized promoter strength is shown.

FIG. 3

Specific activity of glycerol 3-phosphate dehydrogenase of the engineered Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain related to the isogenic wild type. 1 Unit is defined as the conversion of lilmole of substrate per minute and mg protein.

FIG. 4

Ethanol, biomass and glycerol yields in gram per glucose consumed of the engineered Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain and the isogenic wild type after depletion of glucose in fermentations of YEPD medium under oxygen-limited conditions.

FIG. 5

The result of a growth experiment of the engineered Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain and the isogenic wild type on YEPD medium (agar-plates) under aerobic and anaerobic conditions is shown.

FIG. 6

The result of a growth experiment of the engineered Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain and the isogenic wild type in liquid YEPD medium under aerobic conditions is shown.

FIG. 7A through FIG. 7F

Ethanol, glycerol production and sugar consumption after batch fermentation under oxygen-limited conditions at 30° C. in wheat mash. Wheat mash was completely saccharified and centrifuged before fermentation was started. The hydrolysate contained roughly 143 g/l total sugar, i.e. glucose and fructose. Oxygen-limited conditions were obtained by closing the Erlenmeyer flasks with air-locks which allowed the release of gases. Mixing was carried out using a magnetic stirrer set at 200 rpm. For this experiment, the prototrophic S. cerevisiae yeast strain CEN.PK113-7D and a derivative deleted in GPD2 and carrying modifications of the GPD1 promoter (a TEF1 promoter mutant version (mutant promoter 2, SEQ ID NO 5) and the loxP-KmR-loxP sequence as a selectable marker) was used. The genes encoding GPP1 and GPP2 were not modified in this strain.

In FIG. 7A through FIG. 7F, the left bar shows: CEN.PK113-7D, 100% GPD activity, and the right bar shows CEN.PK113-7D, 6% GPD activity.

The y-axis of the panels is as follows:

7A Final glycerol concentration (g/l)

7B Final ethanol concentration (g/l)

7C Glycerol yield (g/g glucose, fructose consumed)

7D Ethanol yield (g/g glucose, fructose consumed)

7E Ration: glycerol/ethanol (g/g)

7F Sugar (glucose, fructose) consumed (g/l)

EXAMPLES

Material and Methods

Media:

YEPD medium (1% yeast extract, 2% peptone, 2% glucose)

Yeast Strains:

The yeast strains generated in this study originate from S. cerevisiae laboratory strain W303-1A (Table 1). The strain YA103 corresponding to a gpp1Δ gpp2Δ double deletion strain has been published by Pahlman et al. (2001).
Further Genetic Modifications of S. cerevisiae Strain YA103:

1. Deletion of GPD2 Gene/Abolishment of GPD2 Expression

The GPD2 gene was disrupted in the strain YA103 by the method described by (Guldener et al., 1996) using pUG72 (Gueldener et al., 2002) as a template and the primers P29 and P30 (Table 2). Disruption of GPD2 was checked by diagnostic PCR using the primer pair P33/P34 (Table 2). Selection of positive transformants was carried out on agar plates containing CSM-medium lacking uracil. The resulting strain has been referred as to EN-GGG (Table 1).

2. Down-Regulation of GPD1 Expression

The native chromosomal GPD1 promoter in the strain EN-GGG was replaced by the promoter replacement cassette amplified from genomic DNA of a yeast strain derived from laboratory yeast BY4741 bearing the mutated TEF promoter with the lowest activity (Nevoigt et al., 2006) in place of the native GPD1 promoter. The primers P9 (SEQ ID NO 7) and P10 (SEQ ID NO 8) were used for PCR amplification of the promoter replacement cassette (including the loxP-K.l.LEU2-loxP sequence as a selectable marker). PCR conditions were as previously published (Nevoigt et al., 2006). Two 100 μl PCR aliquots were combined, precipitated used for transformation as described by Guldener et al. (1996). Selection of positive transformants was carried out on agar plates containing CSM-medium lacking leucine.
Correct integration of the promoter replacement cassette was checked by diagnostic PCR using primer combination P9 (SEQ ID NO 7)/P12 (SEQ ID NO 10) and P11 (SEQ ID NO 9)/P12 (SEQ ID NO 10) (Table 2). The resulting strain has been referred as to EN-G46a (Table 1).

TABLE 1

S. cerevisiae strains used in the examples

Strain	Genotype	Reference

W303-1A*	MATa	Thomas and
		Rothstein (1989)
YA103*	MATa gpp1Δ::kanMX4 gpp2Δ::HIS3	Pählman et al. (2001)
EN-GGG*	MATa gpp1Δ::kamMX4 gpp2Δ::HIS3 gpd2Δ::K.l.URA3
EN-G46a*	MATa gpp1Δ::kan.MX4 gpp2Δ::HIS3 gpd2Δ::K.l.URA3
	Gpd1p:: TEFmut2::K.l.LEU2

*These strains harbor additional mutations as follows: leu2-3/112 ura3-1 trp1-1 his3-11/15 ade2-1 can1-100 GAL SUC2 ma10

TABLE 2

Primers used

Use/name	Sequence	SEQ ID NO

Amplification of the promoter replacement cassette including the TEF1 promoter

mutant version (mutant promoter 2 described in Nevoigt et al., 2006) and the

loxP K.l.LEU2-loxP sequence as a selectable marker:

P9 (binds upstream	cccaaggcaggacagttacc	SEQ ID NO 7
GPD1 prom.)

P10 (binds in GPD1	agcaccagatagagcaccaca	SEQ ID NO 8
cod. seq.)

Diagnostic PCR to check the correct integration of the promoter replacement

cassette:

P11 (binds in Kl.LEU2)	ggaccaccaacagcacctagt	SEQ ID NO 9

P12 (binds downstream	gtaagcaactgttgtttcaga	SEQ ID NO 10
integration site in GPD1
coding sequence)

Deletion of GPD2 using loxP-K.l.URA3.-loxP as a selectable marker:

P29	atgcttgctgtcagaagattaacaagatacacattec	SEQ ID NO 12
	ttagatcccaatacaacaGatcacg

P30	cgatgtctagetettcaateatctccggtaggictte	SEQ ID NO 13
	catgattatttaggttctatcg

Diagnostic PCR to check the disruption of GPD2:

P33	ggtagattcaattetetttecc	SEQ ID NO 14

P34	aggcaacaggaaagatcagagg	SEQ ID NO 15

Oxygen-Limited Batch-Fermentations and Determination of Product Yields

1st Day:

- 1^stpre-culture: inoculate 20 ml YEPD with 500111 glycerol stock
- Incubate over night at 30° C. at a shaker (170 rpm) for 20 hours

2nd Day:

- 2nd preculture: inoculate 150 ml YEPD with 1.5 ml of the first preculture
- Incubate over night at 30° C. at a shaker (170 rpm) for 20 hours

3rd Day:

- Centrifuge 2nd preculture (10 min, 5000 rpm, 4° C.) and wash the cells once with distilled water
- Inoculation of main culture: inoculate 100 ml YEPD in 100 ml—Schott flasks by adjusting an OD of 0.2
- Immediately, samples were taken for determination of initial concentrations of glycerol, ethanol, glucose and biomass
- Add a magnetic stirrer and close the flasks with air locks to ensure release of gases but prevent oxygen intake
- Stir the culture for 24 h at 28° C. and 300 rpm

4th Day:

- Samples (2×1 ml) were taken, centrifuged (10 min, 12000 rpm, 4° C.) and the supernatants were stored at −20° C. until glycerol, ethanol and glucose concentrations were measured. The measurements of glucose and fermentation products were carried out as previously described (Nevoigt and Stahl, 1996). Yeast dry weight (biomass) at the end of fermentation was determined by filtering 30 ml of the culture using pre-weighted nitrocellulose filters (pore size 0.45 mm). The filters with the cells were washed with distilled water and dried until the weight reached a stable value.

Determination of Specific Activity of Glycerol 3-Phosphate Dehydrogenase

In vitro enzyme activities were, in general, determined during logarithmic growth, i.e. when cell density was about 1 during the batch fermentations. Yeast cells were broken by vortexing with glass beads (0.5 mm in diameter) for 15 min at 4° C. in accordance with a previously described method (Ciriacy, 1975). In order to assay GPD, approximately 3×10⁹cells were harvested and homogenized in 3 ml triethanolamine buffer (Blomberg and Adler, 1989; Andre et al., 1991) containing 0.2 mmol/1-phenylmethyl-sulphonylfluoride and 2 g glass beads. The homogenate was centrifuged in each case at 12 000 g and 4° C. for 15 min. The supernatant was used after desalting by passage through a Sephadex G-25 column. (Pharmacia PD-10, Pharmacia Fine Chemicals, Sweden). GPD was assayed in imidazole buffer at pH 7.0 in accordance to Gancedo et al. (1968). Protein concentration was measured by the Coomassie blue method (Bradford, 1976), using bovine serum albumin A 3350 (Sigma Chemical Co., St Louis, Mo.) as a standard (Nevoigt and Stahl, 1996).

Growth on Agar Plates Under Aerobic and Anaerobic Conditions

Stationary phase cultures of the two strains in YEPD medium were diluted (decadal dilutions) and an aliquot was transferred to YEPD agar plates using a stamp. Plates were incubated for 3 days. Oxygen-free conditions were obtained by applying Anaerocult A (MERCK) in an airtight incubator.

Deletions of GPP1 and GPP2

Deletion of the GPP1 gene can be accomplished by the long flanking homology PCR-targeting technique (Pahlman et al, 2001). In the first step, a set of primers (TGTGTGAGTTCCTCTTTTCTT (SEQ ID NO 16) and TCAAAGGCATTGCGATGGTT (SEQ ID NO 17)) was used to amplify a 263 base pair (bp) long portion of genomic DNA from S. cerevisiae W303, upstream from the third codon in the GPP1 ORF. A second set (CGCTAAGGATGACTTGTTGA (SEQ ID NO 18) and CTCTAACTTCTCGTCGTACT (SEQ ID NO 19)) was used to amplify a 358 by fragment from the ninth codon in the GPP1 ORF upstream the stop codon. The 59-end of the primers adjacent to the insertion site carried nucleotide extensions homologous to the 59 and 39 regions of the hisGMX6 or kanMX4 disruption cassette of plasmid pFA6a-hisGMX6 and pFA6-kanMX4. In the second PCR reaction, pFA6a-hisGMX6 and pFA6-kanMX4 were used as templates and the 59 and 39 homologous regions of the first PCR reaction were fused to the disruption cassette by serving as primers together with the upstream forward and downstream reverse primers of the flanking regions, thus producing the ORF targeting cassette. This cassette was transformed into a haploid S. cerevisiae W303 strain, and independent transformants were selected for verification of GPP1 replacement. Using a set of primers (forward: CAAGCAGGAAATCCGTATCA (SEQ ID NO 20) and reverse TCATATGGAGCAATCCCACT (SEQ ID NO 21)) hybridizing upstream and downstream, respectively, of the disruption cassette chromosomal DNA was amplified. The length of the PCR products was verified by agarose-gel electrophoresis. The GPP2 ORF was disrupted in a similar way using a set of primers (CAAGTGAGGACTTTTCGGAT (SEQ ID NO 22) and GTAGTCAATCCCATTCCGAA (SEQ ID NO 23)) to amplify a 346-bp fragment upstream from the fourth codon in the ORF. The second set (GGACGATCTGTTGAAATGGT (SEQ ID NO 24) and CCTGTCCACTTTCAAGTTGCT (SEQ ID NO 25)) was used to amplify a 287-bp fragment from the seventh codon in the GPP2 ORF downstream the stop codon. Correct integration of the disruption modules into the GPP1 and GPP2 alleles was verified by PCR using appropriate primers.
Based on this strain, further deletions were introduced as described herein.

Preliminary Experiments

In initial studies, the inventors tested strains deleted in GPP for their ability to prevent glycerol formation in fuel bio-ethanol production. The complete elimination of GPD, a key enzyme in glycerol biosynthesis, was not straightforward. The main advantages of abolishing GPP activity, instead of GPD, have been seen in i) keeping the NADH reoxidizing step of glycerol biosynthesis (fulfilled by gene products of GPD1/2), and ii) providing L-G3P for anabolic purposes (FIG. 1).
Both single deletion strains (gpp1Δ and gpp2Δ) and a double deletion strain (gpp1Δ gpp2Δ) of the laboratory yeast strain W301-1A were studied. The phenotypes of the different strains were characterized during dynamic ethanol fermentation processes in a highly instrumented bio-reactor in mineral medium under aerobic conditions. Comparative analysis of the wildtype strain and the different mutant strains led to the following conclusions:

- a single deletion of one of the two GPP genes did not lead to important phenotypic changes (growth, ethanol and glycerol production)
- the glycerol concentration was only decreased by 65% in the double deletion mutant gpp1Δ gpp20 but not abolished
- the gpp1Δ gpp2Δ double mutant showed a negatively affected growth rate (decreased by 65%) and a lower ethanol tolerance

The pathway of glycerol formation in a gpp1Δ gpp2Δ mutant is unknown. Moreover, the reasons for negatively affected growth and the lower ethanol tolerance in the double deletion mutant gpp1Δ gpp2Δ remain unclear. Nevertheless, data shows that complete deletion of GPP is also not straightforward to strongly improve ethanol productivity. GPP likely has another unknown but important function in the cell.
Our experiments show that growth of a gpp1Δ gpp2Δ mutant can be recovered to wild-type level after reducing GPD activity in this strain. It is therefore assumed, without wanting to be bound to theory, that a high intracellular accumulation of L-glycerol 3-phosphate is responsible for the growth defect of a gpp1Δ gpp2Δ mutant. This high level is reduced when GPD activity is reduced in the cell.
Hence, the inventors surprisingly found that cell fitness is maintained (in GPP wild-type) or restored (in cells with abolished GPP activity) if the activity of GPD, a key enzyme in the glycerol biosynthetic pathway is not completely abolished, but instead a minimal flux through the key enzyme required by the cell is maintained. This is in contrast to complete abolishment of GPD or GPP, as both proved to be detrimental for cell fitness.

Generation of Promoters of Graded Activities for Fine-Tuning Enzyme Activities

It is of crucial importance to have tools for fine-tuning enzyme activities in order to determine cells' minimal requirements with regard to the flux through the glycerol biosynthetic pathway. Recently, a robust and well-characterized collection of yeast promoter mutants of finely graded strengths was developed (Alper et al., 2005; Nevoigt et al., 2006). Using these promoter mutants, promoter replacement cassettes were created, which are now available in combination with two different genetically selectable markers. To show the utility of these promoter cassettes, they have been used to tune GPD1 expression in S. cerevisiae and analyze the impact on glycerol formation and biomass yield (Nevoigt et al., 2006).

Results

A S. cerevisiae laboratory strain was generated which carries deletions in the genes GPP1, GPP2 and GPD2 and which has a very low expression of GPD1 due to the fact that the native GPD1 promoter in the yeast genome was replaced by a weak promoter. This weak promoter (SEQ ID NO 5) was obtained from the TEF1 promoter mutant collection (TEFp mutant 2) created by Nevoigt et al. (2007) and is shown together with the TEF1 wild type promoter (SEQ ID NO 11) in FIG. 2.
This strain referred to as gpp1Δ gpp2Δ gpd2Δ TEFlpmut2-GPD1 (EN-G46a; Table 1) showed a GPD activity which was about 7% that of the isogenic wild type (FIG. 3). The gpp1Δ gpp2Δ gpd2Δ TEF1pmut2-GPD1 and the corresponding wild type were used to ferment 2% glucose in a complex medium (YEPD) under oxygen limiting conditions (see Methods above). The engineered strain showed a glycerol yield per gram glucose consumed which was only 14.5% that of the wild type (FIG. 4). The ethanol yield (gram ethanol per gram glucose consumed) was 6.7% higher than the wild type yield (FIG. 4). Surprisingly, the final biomass yield (FIG. 4) was not influenced by the engineering of the glycerol pathway even though the conditions during the batch fermentation were quasi anaerobic (100 ml culture in 100 ml flasks closed with air-locks). The growth of both strains under aerobic and anaerobic conditions was also investigated using YEPD agar plates and there was virtually no difference (FIG. 5). The growth in liquid YEPD medium under aerobic conditions was also shown to be the same (FIG. 6). Both strains showed an average growth rate of 0.27 during exponential growth phase.
Preliminary experiments have shown that the same result can be obtained by down-regulating GPD activity alone, i.e. without GPP1 and GPP2 deletions. Therefore, it seems that the deletions of GPP1 and GPP2 are not necessary for the invention.

Industrial Relevance of the Results

The results obtained have a great impact on bio-ethanol production (including biofuels of the first generation) as more ethanol can be produced from the same amount of substrate (carbohydrates such as hydrolysates of starch, cellulose or hemicellulose). Moreover, glycerol production is strongly reduced. This is also important because glycerol participates to the fouling of the distillation units in bio-ethanol production process.
This is the first time that glycerol production was strongly reduced without negatively influencing growth under oxygen limiting conditions. The increase in ethanol productivity is higher than described in the prior art due to the normal growth rate of the cells together with an increased production of ethanol at the expense of glycerol formation.

REFERENCES

Alfenore, S., Cameleyre, X., Benbadis, L., Bideaux, C., Uribelarrea, J. L., Goma, G., Molina-Jouve, C. and Guillouet, S. E. (2004). Aeration strategy: a need for very high ethanol performance in Saccharomyces cerevisiae fed-batch process. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 63, 537-42.
Alper, H., Fischer, C., Nevoigt, E. and Stephanopoulos, G. (2005). Tuning genetic control through promoter engineering. Prof Natl Acad Sci USA 102, 12678-83.
Anderlund, M., Nissen, T. L., Nielsen, J., Villadsen, J., Rydstrom, J., Hahn-Hagerdal, B. and Kielland-Brandt, M. C. (1999). Expression of the Escherichia coli pntA and pntB genes, encoding nicotinamide nucleotide transhydrogenase, in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and its effect on product formation during anaerobic glucose fermentation. Appl Environ Microbiol 65, 2333-40.
Andre L, Hemming A, Adler L. 1991. Osmoregulation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Studies on the osmotic induction of glycerol production and glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (NAD+). FEBS Lett 286(1-2):13-7.
Ansell, R., Granath, K., Hohmann, S., Thevelein, J. M. and Adler, L. (1997). The two isoenzymes for yeast NAD+-dependent glycerol 3-phosphate dehydrogenase encoded by GPD1 and GPD2 have distinct roles in osmoadaptation and redox regulation. Einbo J 16, 2179-87.
Bakker, B. M., Overkamp, K. M., van Maris, A. J., Kotter, P., Luttik, M. A., van Dijken, J. P. and Pronk, J. T. (2001). Stoichiometry and compartmentation of NADH metabolism in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. FEMS Microbiol Rev 25, 15-37.
Blomberg A, Adler L. 1989. Roles of glycerol and glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (NAD+) in acquired osmotolerance of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Bacteriol 171(2), 1087-92.
Bothast, R. J. and Schlicher, M. A. (2005). Biotechnological processes for conversion of corn into ethanol. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 67, 19-25.
Bradford M M. 1976. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 72, 248-54.
Bro, C., Regenberg, B., Forster, J. and Nielsen, J. (2005). In silico aided metabolic engineering of Saccharomyces cerevisiae for improved bioethanol production. Metab Eng.
Ciriacy M. 1975. Genetics of alcohol dehydrogenase in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. II. Two loci controlling synthesis of the glucose-repressible ADH II. Mol Gen Genet 138(2), 157-64.
Ferreira, C., van Voorst, F., Martins, A., Neves, L., Oliveira, R., Kielland-Brandt, M. C., Lucas, C. and Brandt, A. (2005). A member of the sugar transporter family, Stllp is the glycerol/H+ symporter in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Biol Cell 16, 2068-76.
Gancedo C, Gancedo J M, Sols A. 1968. Glycerol metabolism in yeasts. Pathways of utilization and production. Eur J Biochem 5(2), 165-72.
Granath K, Modig T, Forsmark A, Adler L, Liden G. (2005) The YIG1 (YPL201c) encoded protein is involved in regulating anaerobic glycerol metabolism in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast 22(16), 1257-68.
Gueldener, U., Heinisch, J., Koehler, G. J., Voss, D. and Hegemann, J. H. (2002). A sec and set of loxP marker cassettes for Cre-mediated multiple gene knockouts in budding yeast. Nucleic Acids Res 30, e23.
Guldener, U., Heck, S., Fielder, T., Beinhauer, J. and Hegemann, J. H. (1996). A new efficient gene disruption cassette for repeated use in budding yeast. Nucleic Acids Res 24, 2519-24.
Hohmann, S. (2002). Osmotic stress signaling and osmoadaptation in yeasts. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 66, 300-72.
Izawa, S., Sato, M., Yokoigawa, K. and Inoue, Y. (2004). Intracellular glycerol influences resistance to freeze stress in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: analysis of a quadruple mutant in glycerol dehydrogenase genes and glycerol-enriched cells. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 66, 108-14.
Jeffries, T. W. (2006). Engineering yeasts for xylose metabolism. Curr Opin Biotechnol 17, 320-6.
Karhumaa, K., Wiedemann, B., Hahn-Hagerdal, B., Boles, E. and Gorwa-Grauslund, M. F. (2006). Co-utilization of L-arabinose and D-xylose by laboratory and industrial Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains. Microb Cell Fact 5, 18.
Kohlwein, S. D., Daum, G., Schneiter, R. and Paltauf, F. (1996). Phospholipids: synthesis, sorting, subcellular traffic—the yeast approach. Trends Cell Biol 6, 260-6.
Lin, Y. and Tanaka, S. (2006). Ethanol fermentation from biomass resources: current state and prospects. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 69, 627-42.
Lynd, L. R., van Zyl, W. H., McBride, J. E. and Laser, M. (2005). Consolidated bioprocessing of cellulosic biomass: an update. Curr Opin Biotechnol 16, 577-83.
Molin, M., Norbeck, J. and Blomberg, A. (2003). Dihydroxyacetone kinases in Saccharomyces cerevisiae are involved in detoxification of dihydroxyacetone. J Biol Chem 278, 1415-23.
Mullner, H. and Daum, G. (2004). Dynamics of neutral lipid storage in yeast. Acta Biochirn Pol 51, 323-47.
Nevoigt, E., Fischer, C., Mucha, O., Matthaus, F., Stahl, U. and Stephanopoulos, G. (2007). Engineering promoter regulation. Biotechnol Bioeng 96, 550-8.
Nevoigt, E., Kohnke, J., Fischer, C. R., Alper, H., Stahl, U. and Stephanopoulos, G. (2006). Engineering of Promoter Replacement Cassettes for Fine-Tuning of Gene Expression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl Environ Microbiol 72, 5266-73.
Nevoigt, E., Pilger, R., Mast-Gerlach, E., Schmidt, U., Freihammer, S., Eschenbrenner, M., Garbe, L. and Stahl, U. (2002). Genetic engineering of brewing yeast to reduce the content of ethanol in beer. FEMS Yeast Res 2, 225-32.
Nevoigt, E. and Stahl, U. (1996). Reduced pyruvate decarboxylase and increased glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenase [NAD+] levels enhance glycerol production in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast 12, 1331-7.
Nevoigt, E. and Stahl, U. (1997). Osmoregulation and glycerol metabolism in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. FEMS Microbiol Rev 21, 231-41.
Nguyen, H. T., Dieterich, A., Athenstaedt, K., Truong, N. H., Stahl, U. and Nevoigt, E. (2004). Engineering of Saccharomyces cerevisiae for the production of L-glycerol 3-phosphate. Metab Eng 6, 155-63.
Nissen, T. L., Anderlund, M., Nielsen, J., Villadsen, J. and Kielland-Brandt, M. C. (2001). Expression of a cytoplasmic transhydrogenase in Saccharomyces cerevisiae results in formation of 2-oxoglutarate due to depletion of the NADPH pool. Yeast 18, 19-32.
Nissen, T. L., Hamann, C. W., Kielland-Brandt, M. C., Nielsen, J. and Villadsen, J. (2000a). Anaerobic and aerobic batch cultivations of Saccharomyces cerevisiae mutants impaired in glycerol synthesis. Yeast 16, 463-74.
Nissen, T. L., Kielland-Brandt, M. C., Nielsen, J. and Villadsen, J. (2000b). Optimization of ethanol production in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by metabolic engineering of the ammonium assimilation. Metab Eng 2, 69-77.
Norbeck, J. and Blomberg, A. (1997). Metabolic and regulatory changes associated with growth of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in 1.4 M NaCl. Evidence for osmotic induction of glycerol dissimilation via the dihydroxyacetone pathway. J Biol Chem 272, 5544-54.
Oliveira, R., Lages, F., Silva-Graca, M. and Lucas, C. (2003). Fps1p channel is the mediator of the major part of glycerol passive diffusion in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: artefacts and re-definitions. Biochim Biophys Acta 1613, 57-71.
Pahlman, A. K., Granath, K., Ansell, R., Hohmann, S. and Adler, L. (2001). The yeast glycerol 3-phosphatases Gpp1p and Gpp2p are required for glycerol biosynthesis and differentially involved in the cellular responses to osmotic, anaerobic, and oxidative stress. J Biol Chem 276, 3555-63.
Rigoulet, M., Aguilaniu, H., Averet, N., Bunoust, O., Camougrand, N., Grandier-Vazeille, X., Larsson, C., Pahlman, I. L., Manon, S. and Gustafsson, L. (2004). Organization and regulation of the cytosolic NADH metabolism in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Cell Biochem 256-257, 73-81.
Siderius, M., Van Wuytswinkel, O., Reijenga, K. A., Kelders, M. and Mager, W. H. (2000). The control of intracellular glycerol in Saccharomyces cerevisiae influences osmotic stress response and resistance to increased temperature. Mol Microbiol 36, 1381-90.
Valadi, A., Granath, K., Gustafsson, L. and Adler, L. (2004). Distinct intracellular localization of Gpd1p and Gpd2p, the two yeast isoforms of NAD+-dependent glycerol-3phosphate dehydrogenase, explains their different contributions to redox-driven glycerol production. J Biol Chem 279, 39677-85.
Wojda, I., Alonso-Monge, R., Bebelman, J. P., Mager, W. H. and Siderius, M. (2003). Response to high osmotic conditions and elevated temperature in Saccharomyces cerevisiae is controlled by intracellular glycerol and involves coordinate activity of MAP kinase pathways. Microbiology 149, 1193-204.

Claims

1. A method of modifying a yeast cell for the production of ethanol, characterized by reducing the activity of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized by reducing the activity of the Gpd1 and eliminating the activity of the Gpd2 protein.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized by eliminating the activity of the Gpd1 and reducing the activity of the Gpd2 protein.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized by reducing the activity of the Gpd1 and reducing the activity of the Gpd2 protein.

5. The method according to claim 1,

characterized in that the reduction of the activity of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein is achieved by

reducing the expression of the GPD1 gene and/or the GPD2 gene,

providing an antisense molecule to the GPD1 and/or the GPD2 mRNA,

providing an antagonist to the Gpd1 and/or the Gpd2 protein,

providing a mutated form of the Gpd1 and/or the Gpd2 protein, or

providing a small inhibitory molecule for inhibiting the Gpd1 and/or the Gpd2 protein.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that the GPD1 gene and/or the GPD2 gene is expressed by a promoter that is operably linked to the GPD1 gene or the GPD2 gene, wherein the promoter causes less than or equal to 20% transcription of the TEF1 promoter operably linked to the GPD1 gene or the GPD2 gene.

7. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that the expression of the GPD1 gene and/or the GPD2 gene is reduced by at least 50% compared to the expression in a wild type yeast cell.

8. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that the promoter is a promoter according to SEQ ID NO 5 or SEQ ID NO 6.

9. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that the antisense molecule has a sequence that hybridizes with the mRNA according to SEQ ID NO 1 or SEQ ID NO 2.

10. The method according to claim 9, characterized in that the antisense molecule hybridizes with any 10 to 30 bases of the mRNA according to SEQ ID NO 1 or SEQ ID NO 2.

11. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that the mutated form of the Gpd1 protein and/or the Gpd2 protein bears a mutation in a functional domain of the protein.

12. The method according to claim 1, characterized by additionally reducing the activity of the Gpp1 protein and/or the Gpp2 protein.

13. The method according to claim 12, characterized by reducing the activity of the Gpp1 and eliminating the activity of the Gpp2 protein.

14. The method according to claim 12, characterized by eliminating the activity of the Gpp1 and reducing the activity of the Gpp2 protein.

15. The method according to claim 12, characterized by reducing the activity of the Gpp1 and reducing the activity of the Gpp2 protein.

16. The method according to claim 12, characterized in that the reduction of the activity of the Gpp1 protein and/or the Gpp2 protein is achieved by

reducing the expression of the Gpp1 and/or the Gpp2 protein,

providing an antisense molecule to the GPP1 and/or the GPP2 mRNA,

providing an antagonist to the Gpp1Δnd/or the Gpp2 protein,

providing a mutated form of the Gpp1 protein and/or the Gpp2 protein, or providing a small inhibitory molecule for inhibiting the Gpp1 protein and/or the Gpp2 protein.

17. The method according to claim 16, characterized in that the GPP1 gene and/or the GPP2 gene is expressed by a promoter that is operably linked to the GPP1 gene or the GPP2 gene, wherein the promoter causes less than or equal to 20% transcription of the TEF1 promoter operably linked to the GPP1 gene or the GPP2 gene.

18. The method according to claim 17, characterized in that the expression of the GPP1 gene and/or the GPP2 gene is reduced by at least 50% compared to the expression in a wild type yeast cell.

19. The method according to claim 17, characterized in that the promoter is a promoter according to SEQ ID NO 5 or SEQ ID NO 6.

20. The method according to claim 16, characterized in that the antisense molecule has a sequence that hybridizes with the mRNA according to SEQ ID NO 3 or SEQ ID NO 4.

21. The method according to claim 20, characterized in that the antisense molecule hybridizes with any 10 to 30 bases, preferably with any 18 to 23 bases of the mRNA according to SEQ ID NO 3 or SEQ ID NO 4.

22. The method according to claim 16, characterized in that the mutated form of the Gpp1 protein and/or the Gpp2 protein bears a mutation in a functional domain of the protein.

23. A modified yeast cell, in which the activity of the Gpd1 and/or Gpd2 protein is reduced compared to a wild-type yeast cell.

24. The modified yeast cell according to claim 23, characterized in that the reduced activity is achieved by

reduced expression of the GPD1 gene and/or GPD2 gene,

a presence of an antisense molecule to the GPD1 and/or GPD2 mRNA,

a presence of an antagonist to the Gpd1 protein and/or Gpd2 protein, a presence of a mutated form of a Gpd1 protein and/or Gpd2 protein, or

a presence of a small inhibitory molecule for inhibiting the Gpd1 and/or the Gpd2 protein.

25. The modified yeast cell according to claim 24, characterized in that the GPD1 and/or the GPD2 gene is expressed by a promoter that is operably linked to the GPD1 gene or the GPD2 gene, wherein the promoter is weak compared to the promoter in the wild-type yeast cell.

26. The modified yeast cell according to claim 30, characterized in that the expression of the GPD1 gene and/or the GPD2 gene is reduced by at least 50% compared to the expression of the wild type gene.

27. The modified yeast cell according to claim 25, characterized in that the promoter is a promoter according to SEQ ID NO 5 or SEQ ID NO 6.

28. The modified yeast cell according to claim 24, characterized in that the antisense molecule to the GPD1 gene and/or the GPD2 mRNA has a sequence that hybridizes with the mRNA according to SEQ ID NO 1 or SEQ ID NO 2.

29. The modified yeast cell according to claim 28, characterized in that the antisense molecule hybridizes with any 10 to 30 bases of the mRNA according to SEQ ID NO 1 or SEQ ID NO 2.

30. The modified yeast cell according to claim 24, characterized in that the mutated form of a Gpd1 and/or Gpd2 protein bears a mutation in a functional domain of the protein.

31. Use of a genetically modified yeast cell according to claim 23 for producing ethanol.

32. A method for the production of ethanol, comprising the following steps:

providing a yeast cell according to claim 23,

providing biomass,

growing the yeast cell in the presence of the biomass under conditions that allow for the production of ethanol.