Synthetic Promoters for Natural Product Discovery: Refactoring Gene Clusters to Unlock Novel Therapeutics

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive overview of the strategies and technologies for refactoring natural product biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) using synthetic promoters. Aimed at researchers and drug development professionals, it covers the foundational rationale for activating silent BGCs, details cutting-edge methodological tools like CRISPR-based refactoring and AI-driven promoter design, addresses key troubleshooting and optimization challenges, and presents validation case studies. By synthesizing recent advances, this review serves as a guide for leveraging synthetic biology to access the vast untapped potential of microbial genomes for the discovery of new bioactive molecules, with significant implications for pharmaceutical development.

The Silent Potential: Why Refactor Natural Product Gene Clusters?

The Problem of Cryptic Biosynthetic Gene Clusters (BGCs) in Microbial Genomes

Microbial genomes represent a vast reservoir of biosynthetic potential for novel natural products (NPs) with applications in medicine and biotechnology. Biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) are groups of co-localized genes that encode the enzymatic machinery for the production of secondary metabolites. Genomic sequencing has revealed that the majority of BGCs in microbial genomes are either "cryptic" or "silent," meaning their products are not detected under standard laboratory fermentation conditions [1] [2]. While these terms are often used interchangeably, a precise distinction exists: silent BGCs refer to clusters that are not transcribed under laboratory conditions, whereas cryptic BGCs encompass both silent clusters and those whose products remain unknown or undetected despite expression [2]. This terminology clarification is essential for effective communication within the research community.

The scale of this unexplored biosynthetic potential is staggering. Analysis of actinobacterial genomes reveals that a typical strain may harbor 20-50 BGCs, yet only a fraction of these are expressed under standard laboratory conditions [2]. Across the bacterial domain, it is estimated that approximately 90% of BGCs remain uncharacterized, representing an enormous reservoir of potential novel compounds [3]. This discrepancy between biosynthetic potential and observable metabolic output represents one of the most significant challenges and opportunities in modern natural product discovery.

Table 1: Classification of Biosynthetic Gene Clusters Based on Expression and Product Identification

Category	BGC Expression Status	Product Identification Status	Terminology
1	Expressed	Identified	Characterized
2	Not expressed (silent)	Unidentified	Silent
3	Expressed	Unidentified	Cryptic (product unknown)
4	Unknown	Unidentified	Cryptic (fully unexplored)

Activation Strategies for Cryptic and Silent BGCs

Endogenous Activation Approaches

Endogenous strategies focus on activating silent BGCs within their native host organisms, preserving the native physiological context for biosynthesis. These approaches can be broadly categorized into genetics-reliant methods, chemical genetics, and culture modality modifications [1].

Reporter-Guided Mutant Selection (RGMS) is a powerful forward genetics technique that combines random mutagenesis with sophisticated screening. This method involves creating random mutant libraries via UV irradiation or transposon mutagenesis, followed by selection of mutants exhibiting activation of target BGCs using genetic reporters or advanced metabolomics [1]. For example, Guo et al. successfully applied RGMS to activate the silent pga gene cluster in Streptomyces sp. PGA64, leading to the discovery of novel glycosylated gaudimycin analogs [1]. The methodology typically employs a double-reporter system where promoters of silent BGCs are fused to both a resistance marker (e.g., neo for kanamycin resistance) and a visual marker (e.g., xylE for catecholase activity that stains colonies brown) to facilitate mutant selection.

Chemical genetics approaches utilize small molecules to perturb cellular regulatory networks and activate silent BGCs. This strategy has proven effective in numerous actinomycetes, where treatment with histone deacetylase inhibitors or DNA methyltransferase inhibitors can lead to dramatic changes in secondary metabolome profiles by altering epigenetic regulation [1].

Culture modality modifications represent a more subtle approach to BGC activation. By systematically varying growth media composition, aeration, temperature, or incorporating co-culture techniques, researchers can mimic natural environmental conditions that trigger BGC expression. These methods leverage the native regulatory circuitry of the producing organism without requiring genetic manipulation [1].

Heterologous Expression and BGC Refactoring

Heterologous expression involves transferring BGCs into genetically tractable host organisms, decoupling BGC expression from native regulatory constraints. This approach is particularly valuable for studying BGCs from unculturable organisms or those with complex growth requirements [4] [3].

BGC refactoring represents a synthetic biology approach that involves replacing native regulatory elements with well-characterized synthetic parts to ensure predictable expression in heterologous hosts. This process typically includes promoter engineering, where native promoters are systematically replaced with constitutive or inducible synthetic promoters [4]. Advanced methods such as mCRISTAR, miCRISTAR, and mpCRISTAR enable multiplexed promoter engineering through CRISPR-based transformation-associated recombination, allowing simultaneous replacement of up to eight promoters with high efficiency [4].

The CONKAT-seq (co-occurrence network analysis of targeted sequences) platform provides a streamlined workflow for large-scale BGC capture and expression. This method involves creating a pooled large-insert clone library from multiple bacterial strains, followed by sequencing-based localization of clones carrying intact BGCs using biosynthetic domain-specific amplification [5]. In one implementation, this approach enabled the interrogation of 70 nonribosomal peptide synthetase (NRPS) and polyketide synthase (PKS) BGCs, with 24% of previously uncharacterized BGCs producing detectable natural products in heterologous hosts [5].

Table 2: Comparison of Major BGC Activation Strategies

Strategy	Key Features	Advantages	Limitations	Success Rate
Endogenous Activation	Works in native host	Physiological relevance; ecological context preserved	Limited to culturable organisms; host-specific tools needed	Variable; depends on specific method and organism
Heterologous Expression	BGC transfer to tractable host	Standardized genetic tools; defined background	May lack essential substrates/cofactors; large BGC cloning challenging	~24% for uncharacterized BGCs [5]
BGC Refactoring	Synthetic regulatory elements	Predictable expression; decoupled from native regulation	Labor-intensive; requires comprehensive DNA synthesis/assembly	Enhanced over native expression

Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Reporter-Guided Mutant Selection (RGMS) for Endogenous Activation

Principle: This protocol uses genetic reporters fused to silent BGC promoters to guide selection of mutants with activated clusters from randomly mutagenized libraries [1].

Materials:

• Target bacterial strain with silent BGC
• Reporter plasmid with promoterless antibiotic resistance and visual marker genes
• UV source or transposon mutagenesis system
• Appropriate antibiotics for selection
• Catechol solution (for xylE visual screening)

Procedure:

• Clone the promoter region of the target silent BGC upstream of the reporter genes in a suitable vector.
• Introduce the reporter construct into the wild-type strain.
• Generate random mutant libraries using either:
  • UV mutagenesis: Expose cell suspensions to UV light (typically 254 nm) at doses yielding 1-10% survival.
  • Transposon mutagenesis: Introduce a mariner-based transposon system via conjugation or transformation.
• Plate mutated cells on selective media containing relevant antibiotics.
• Screen for colonies exhibiting both antibiotic resistance and visual marker expression (e.g., brown pigmentation after catechol spraying for xylE).
• Isolate potential activator mutants and verify through analytical methods (e.g., HPLC-MS).
• Identify mutated genes in activator strains through genome sequencing or transposon location mapping.

Applications: This approach successfully activated the silent pga cluster in Streptomyces sp. PGA64, leading to discovery of gaudimycin analogs, and activated iterative type I PKS in Burkholderia thailandensis, yielding antimicrobial thailandenes [1].

Protocol 2: Multiplexed Promoter Engineering via mCRISTAR

Principle: This protocol uses CRISPR-Cas9 assisted transformation-associated recombination for simultaneous replacement of multiple native promoters in a BGC with synthetic regulatory elements [4].

Materials:

• BGC cloned in yeast-bacterial shuttle vector
• CRISPR-Cas9 system with appropriate gRNAs targeting native promoters
• Library of synthetic promoters with varying strengths
• Saccharomyces cerevisiae assembly strain (e.g., VL6-48)
• Streptomyces albus J1074 or other heterologous host

Procedure:

• Design gRNAs to specifically target each native promoter region in the BGC.
• Amplify synthetic promoter cassettes with 40-60 bp homology arms corresponding to regions flanking native promoters.
• Co-transform the BGC-containing vector, CRISPR-Cas9 components, and promoter cassettes into yeast assembly strain.
• Select for successful recombinants on appropriate dropout media.
• Recover engineered BGC vectors from yeast and transform into E. coli for propagation.
• Verify promoter replacements by sequencing.
• Transfer refactored BGC into heterologous expression host.
• Analyze metabolite production through LC-MS/MS and comparative metabolomics.

Applications: This method enabled refactoring of the actinorhodin BGC from Streptomyces coelicolor by replacing seven native promoters with four strong regulatory cassettes, resulting in successful heterologous production in S. albus J1074 [4].

Protocol 3: CONKAT-seq for Multiplexed BGC Capture and Expression

Principle: This protocol enables parallel capture, identification, and heterologous expression of numerous BGCs from bacterial strain collections through co-occurrence network analysis [5].

Materials:

• Pooled genomic DNA from target bacterial strains
• PAC shuttle vector with E. coli and Streptomyces replication origins
• Degenerate primers for conserved biosynthetic domains (e.g., NRPS adenylation, PKS ketosynthase)
• High-throughput sequencing platform
• E. coli EPI300 and Streptomyces albus J1074 hosts

Procedure:

• Extract high-molecular-weight DNA from pooled bacterial biomass (100+ strains).
• Create large-insert library (~140 kb average insert size) in PAC vector, array clones in microplates.
• Create two types of pools: plate-pools (same plate) and well-pools (same well position across plates).
• Amplify target biosynthetic domains from pools using barcoded degenerate primers.
• Sequence amplicons and analyze co-occurrence patterns to identify clones carrying intact BGCs.
• Recover PAC clones containing full BGCs based on CONKAT-seq predictions.
• Transfer cloned BGCs into heterologous hosts via conjugation.
• Ferment recombinant strains and analyze extracts via LC-MS.
• Identify BGC-specific metabolites by comparing chemical profiles to control strains.

Applications: Implementation of this platform led to discovery of prolinolexin, cinnamexin, and conkatamycin—previously uncharacterized natural products with potent antibiotic activity against multi-drug resistant Staphylococcus aureus [5].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for BGC Refactoring and Heterologous Expression

Reagent/Category	Specific Examples	Function/Application	Key Features
Heterologous Hosts	Streptomyces albus J1074, S. lividans RedStrep	Expression chassis for refactored BGCs	Reduced native metabolism; efficient BGC expression [5]
Synthetic Promoters	Randomized promoter-RBS libraries, orthogonal systems	Transcriptional control in refactored BGCs	Tunable strength; cross-species compatibility [4]
Cloning Systems	PAC shuttle vectors, BAC/FAC systems, TAR cloning	Large DNA fragment capture and mobilization	Capacity for large BGCs; shuttle between multiple hosts [5]
Assembly Tools	mCRISTAR, miCRISTAR, ExoCET, Gibson Assembly	Multiplexed BGC engineering and refactoring	High-efficiency multipart assembly; promoter swapping [4] [3]
Bioinformatics Tools	antiSMASH, PRISM, BiG-SCAPE, MIBiG	BGC identification, analysis, and prioritization	Genome mining; BGC classification and novelty assessment [1] [6]
Reporter Systems	xylE-neo cassette, fluorescent proteins, lux operons	Detection of BGC activation in native hosts	Dual selection markers; quantitative readouts [1]

Workflow Diagrams

Diagram 1: Comprehensive workflow for cryptic BGC activation strategies showing parallel approaches for endogenous and heterologous methods.

Diagram 2: BGC refactoring workflow using synthetic promoters, highlighting key steps from identification to natural product characterization.

Synthetic Promoters as Universal Switches for Gene Expression

Refactoring natural product biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) represents a pivotal strategy for activating silent metabolic pathways and enhancing the production of valuable bioactive compounds. Synthetic promoters serve as universal genetic switches in this process, enabling precise, programmable control over gene expression that bypasses the native, often complex and inefficient, regulatory networks [7] [8]. The design of artificial synthetic promoters allows researchers to overcome the limitations of native promoters, which frequently exhibit insufficient strength, undesirable basal activity, or inadequate responsiveness to external stimuli [9]. By engineering cis-regulatory modules, synthetic biology provides tools to orchestrate the transcription of multiple genes within a BGC in a coordinated and optimized manner, leading to significant improvements in the yield of specialized metabolites, such as the 20.4-fold increase in daptomycin production achieved through promoter engineering [8]. This application note details the design principles, quantitative performance, and practical protocols for implementing synthetic promoters to refactor natural product pathways effectively.

Performance Benchmarks: Quantitative Data on Synthetic Promoter Systems

The following tables summarize key quantitative data from recent studies employing synthetic promoters for refactoring biosynthetic pathways, highlighting their performance and tunability.

Table 1: Performance of Refactored Biosynthetic Gene Clusters Using Synthetic Promoters

Organism/System	Target Pathway/BGC	Refactoring Strategy	Key Performance Outcome	Citation
Streptomyces coelicolor A3(2)	Daptomycin BGC (74 kb)	Combinatorial promoter replacement using CRISETR	20.4-fold increase in daptomycin yield	[8]
Streptomyces spp.	Various BGCs	Multiplexed promoter refactoring with Cas9-BD	High editing efficiency (98.1%), reduced cytotoxicity	[10]
Mammalian Cells (HEK293)	Reporter Genes (Luc2, mKate)	CRISPR/dCas9-VPR with synthetic operators	Up to ~74-fold dynamic range in reporter expression	[11]
Mammalian Cells (HEK293)	Synthetic Promoter Library (TRE-MPRA)	6144 promoters responding to diverse stimuli	Dynamic ranges of 50-100 fold upon stimulation	[12]

Table 2: Tunability of CRISPR-Based Synthetic Promoters in Mammalian Cells

Tuning Parameter	Experimental Manipulation	Observed Effect on Gene Expression
gRNA Seed Sequence GC Content	Optimization to ~50-60% GC	Higher expression levels compared to lower or higher GC content [11]
Number of gRNA Binding Sites (BS)	Varying from 2x to 16x BS	Strong correlation between BS number and output; up to >1000% expression vs. baseline with 16x BS [11]
CRISPR-aTF System	Comparing dCas9-VP16, -VP64, and -VPR	dCas9-VPR yielded markedly higher expression levels [11]

Experimental Protocols for Key Applications

Protocol 1: Multiplexed Promoter Refactoring in Streptomyces Using CRISETR

The CRISETR technique combines CRISPR/Cas9 and RecET recombination for efficient, marker-free, multiplexed refactoring of BGCs in high-GC content actinomycetes like Streptomyces [8].

Workflow Diagram: CRISETR for BGC Refactoring

Materials:

• Bacterial Strains: E. coli GB05-dir-pETgA (for cloning and recombination), E. coli ET12567/pUZ8002 (for conjugation), Streptomyces host strain (e.g., S. coelicolor M1154) [8].
• Vectors: pRCas9 (modified CRISPR/Cas9 plasmid), pSgRNA (sgRNA expression plasmid) [8].
• Growth Media: LB for E. coli, Mannitol-soya flour (MS) agar for Streptomyces sporulation, 2x YT and M-ISP4 for conjugation [8].
• Antibiotics: Apramycin, nalidixic acid (for selection of exconjugants) [8].

Step-by-Step Procedure:

• Design and Synthesis: Design sgRNAs targeting the native promoter regions of the BGC. Synthesize donor DNA fragments containing the desired synthetic promoters, flanked by homology arms (≥500 bp) corresponding to the sequences upstream and downstream of the native promoter.
• Assembly: Clone the sgRNA expression cassette into pSgRNA. Assemble the final CRISETR plasmid(s) containing the Cas9 gene, sgRNA cassette, and RecET system.
• Conjugation: Introduce the assembled CRISETR plasmid and donor DNA into the Streptomyces host via intergeneric conjugation from E. coli ET12567/pUZ8002.
  • Grow the Streptomyces host to a high titer of spores or mycelium.
  • Mix the donor E. coli strain with the Streptomyces cells and plate onto M-ISP4 solid medium containing 25 mM MgCl₂.
  • Incubate at 30°C for 16-20 hours.
• Recombination and Selection: Overlay the plates with appropriate antibiotics (e.g., apramycin) and nalidixic acid (to counter-select against the E. coli donor). Incubate until exconjugants appear.
  • The RecET system mediates efficient homologous recombination between the donor DNA and the chromosome.
  • Concurrently, Cas9 induces double-strand breaks at the native promoter sites, enhancing marker-free replacement.
• Screening and Validation: Isolate exconjugants and screen for correct promoter replacement via colony PCR and DNA sequencing. Ferment positive clones and analyze metabolite production (e.g., via HPLC or LC-MS) to assess BGC activation.

Protocol 2: Identification of Cell-State Specific Promoters Using SPECS

The SPECS platform is a high-throughput screening pipeline that combines a synthetic promoter library, FACS sorting, next-generation sequencing (NGS), and machine learning to identify promoters with enhanced specificity for a target cell state [13].

Workflow Diagram: SPECS Screening Pipeline

Materials:

• SPECS Library: A lentiviral library of 6107 synthetic promoters, each comprising tandem repeats of a single transcription factor binding site (TF-BS) upstream of a minimal promoter, driving the expression of a fluorescent reporter (e.g., mKate2) [13].
• Cell Lines: Target cell state (e.g., cancer stem-like cells, differentiated organoids) and appropriate control cell state.
• Reagents: Lentiviral packaging plasmids, polybrene, FACS buffers, DNA extraction kits, PCR reagents, NGS library preparation kit.

Step-by-Step Procedure:

• Library Delivery: Transduce the SPECS lentiviral library at a low Multiplicity of Infection (MOI) into both the target and control cell populations to ensure most cells receive a single promoter construct.
• Cell Sorting: After an appropriate incubation period, harvest the cells and sort them using FACS into multiple bins based on fluorescence intensity (e.g., negative, low, medium, high, top 5%).
• Promoter Recovery and Sequencing: Isolate genomic DNA from each sorted population. Amplify the integrated promoter sequences by PCR and subject the amplicons to NGS.
• Computational Analysis: Use the NGS read counts of each promoter in each fluorescence bin as input for a machine learning regression model. Train the model with a subset of promoters whose activity has been empirically measured to predict the activity of all promoters in the library across both cell states.
• Identification and Validation: Identify SPECS candidates that show high predicted activity in the target cell state and low activity in the control state. Clone these candidate promoters into reporter vectors for orthogonal validation in fresh batches of target and control cells.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 3: Key Reagent Solutions for Synthetic Promoter Research

Reagent / Tool Name	Function / Description	Key Application(s)
CRISETR System [8]	Combines CRISPR/Cas9 for targeted cleavage with RecET for highly efficient homologous recombination.	Multiplexed, marker-free promoter replacement in high-GC content bacteria like Streptomyces.
Cas9-BD [10]	A modified Cas9 with polyaspartate tags at N- and C-termini to reduce off-target binding and cytotoxicity.	Genome editing and promoter refactoring in strains with high GC-content genomes where wild-type Cas9 is toxic.
TRE-MPRA Library [12]	A Massively Parallel Reporter Assay library of 6144 synthetic promoters (<250 bp) based on TF binding motifs.	High-throughput screening of functional, tunable promoters responsive to diverse cellular stimuli.
SPECS Library & Pipeline [13]	A library of 6107 synthetic promoters screened via FACS/NGS/ML to identify cell-state specific promoters.	Discovering promoters highly specific to cancer cells, stem cells, or other distinct cellular states.
dCas9-VPR Activator [11]	A potent CRISPR-based artificial transcription factor (dCas9 fused to VP64-p65-Rta).	Driving strong, tunable gene expression from synthetic operators in mammalian cells.

Pathway and Regulation Logic

Synthetic promoters function as integrated hubs processing input signals into transcriptional outputs. Their core architecture and the logical operations they enable are foundational to building complex genetic circuits.

Diagram: Synthetic Promoter Architecture and Logic in a Refactored BGC

Architecture and Function:

• Core Components: A typical synthetic promoter consists of a core promoter region, often a minimal promoter containing essential elements like a TATA box for recruiting RNA polymerase II and the pre-initiation complex [9]. Upstream, the proximal promoter region is engineered with specific cis-regulatory elements (CREs)—such as tandem repeats of transcription factor binding sites (TF-BSs)—which are the targets of activated TFs [9] [13].
• Signal Integration: In a refactored BGC, native promoters for multiple genes (e.g., those encoding non-ribosomal peptide synthetases, polyketide synthases, and regulatory proteins) are replaced with synthetic counterparts [8]. These synthetic modules can be designed to respond to specific exogenous inducers (e.g., chemicals, light) or to key endogenous TFs that mark a desired cell state [14] [13].
• Logical Control: This architecture allows for sophisticated logical operations. For example, an AND-gate logic can be implemented by designing a promoter that requires two different TFs for full activation, ensuring expression only in a very specific context. This orthogonality—using well-characterized parts that do not cross-talk with the host's native regulatory networks—is a critical design principle for predictable circuit behavior [14]. The output is the precise spatial and temporal expression of biosynthetic enzymes, leading to the efficient production of the target natural product.

Overcoming Native Regulatory Hurdles through Promoter Engineering

The genomic era has revealed a vast untapped reservoir of biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) in microorganisms that encode potentially valuable natural products, including novel antibiotics and anti-cancer agents. However, approximately 90% of these BGCs remain transcriptionally silent under standard laboratory conditions, presenting a significant hurdle for natural product discovery and development [4] [15]. This application note explores promoter engineering as a powerful synthetic biology approach to overcome native regulatory constraints. By refactoring BGC architecture with synthetic regulatory elements, researchers can activate silent metabolic pathways, optimize compound yields, and accelerate the development of new therapeutic agents.

Promoter Engineering Strategies for BGC Refactoring

Promoter engineering replaces native regulatory elements in BGCs with well-characterized synthetic promoters to disrupt natural transcriptional controls that often silence expression. This strategy is particularly valuable for heterologous expression, where BGCs are transferred from genetically intractable native producers into optimized host chassis with mature genetic systems [4] [16]. Several innovative promoter design approaches have emerged to address different experimental needs.

Table 1: Promoter Engineering Strategies for Activating Silent Biosynthetic Gene Clusters

Strategy	Key Features	Applications	Key Advantages
Orthogonal Synthetic Promoters [4]	Completely randomized promoter and RBS regions; partially fixed -10/-35 and SD sequences	Multiplex promoter engineering in actinomycetes	High sequence orthogonality; avoids homologous recombination
Metagenomic-Mined Promoters [4]	Natural 5' regulatory elements mined from diverse microbial taxa	BGC refactoring in underexplored bacterial taxa	Broad host range; applicable across diverse species
Copy Number-Independent Promoters [4]	TALE-based incoherent feedforward loop design	Stable expression across different plasmid backbones or genomic locations	Resistant to genomic position effects and growth conditions
Salt-Enhanced Promoters [16]	Engineered kasOp* promoter activity enhanced by KCl supplementation	Activation of silent NRPS clusters in Streptomyces	Environmentally inducible; increases yield without genetic modification
AI-Designed Promoters [17]	Deep learning models (PromoDGDE) generating novel sequences with predetermined expression levels	Fine-tuning metabolic pathway expression in E. coli and yeast	Precise expression control; eliminates trial-and-error approaches

Implementation Workflow for Promoter Refactoring

The following diagram illustrates the general workflow for refactoring biosynthetic gene clusters through promoter engineering:

Experimental Protocols

Protocol: Multiplex Promoter Replacement Using CRISPR-TAR

This protocol enables simultaneous replacement of multiple native promoters in a BGC with synthetic counterparts, based on the miCRISTAR (multiplexed in vitro CRISPR-based Transformation-Assisted Recombination) method [4].

Materials:

• Purified BGC DNA (e.g., in BAC vector)
• Synthetic promoter cassettes with 60-bp homology arms
• Cas9 protein and designed sgRNAs targeting native promoters
• Saccharomyces cerevisiae HACK1 strain (or similar)
• Yeast culture media (SC-Trp)
• E. coli-Streptomyces shuttle vector

Procedure:

• Design Phase: Design sgRNAs to target each native promoter region within the BGC. Synthesize synthetic promoter cassettes with 60-bp homology arms flanking each replacement site.
• In Vitro Cleavage: Incubate the BGC-containing vector with Cas9 protein and pooled sgRNAs (5 pmol each) for 4 hours at 37°C to generate linearized DNA.
• Yeast Assembly: Co-transform 500 ng of linearized DNA with 1 µg of pooled synthetic promoter cassettes into S. cerevisiae HACK1 using standard lithium acetate transformation.
• Selection and Validation: Plate transformations on SC-Trp media and incubate for 72 hours at 30°C. Screen colonies by PCR for correct promoter integration.
• Heterologous Expression: Isolve the refactored BGC and transfer into an appropriate heterologous host (e.g., Streptomyces albus J1074) for expression analysis.

Applications: This protocol successfully activated the silent atolypene BGC, leading to the discovery of two novel antitumor sesterterpenes [4].

Protocol: Salt-Enhanced Promoter Activation in Streptomyces

This protocol utilizes the salt-responsive kasOp* promoter combined with KCl supplementation to activate silent BGCs in Streptomyces heterologous hosts [16].

Materials:

• Refactored BGC with kasOp* promoter
• Streptomyces albus J1074 as heterologous host
• R5 agar plates without sucrose
• TSBY liquid medium
• KCl stock solution (3M, sterile)
• Ethyl acetate for extraction
• Analytical standards (e.g., coprisamide A and B)

Procedure:

• Strain Preparation: Transform the refactored BGC (e.g., coprisamide cluster with kasOp* promoter) into S. albus J1074 using standard protoplast transformation.
• Culture Conditions: Inoculate spores into TSBY liquid medium and incubate at 30°C for 48 hours as seed culture.
• Production Phase: Transfer seed culture (10% v/v) into fresh R5 medium supplemented with 0-200 mM KCl. Incubate at 30°C with shaking at 220 rpm for 5-7 days.
• Metabolite Extraction: Harvest culture by centrifugation. Extract supernatant with equal volume of ethyl acetate (3×). Combine organic phases and evaporate under vacuum.
• Product Analysis: Resuspend extract in methanol for LC-MS analysis. Monitor for target compounds using extracted ion chromatography.

Results: Implementation of this protocol with the coprisamide BGC resulted in production titers of 2.5 mg/L without KCl and 9.6 mg/L with 150 mM KCl supplementation, demonstrating a 3.8-fold enhancement [16].

The workflow for this salt-enhanced strategy is illustrated below:

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents for Promoter Engineering Applications

Reagent / Tool	Function	Application Examples	Key Features
Synthetic Promoter Libraries [4] [18]	Provide orthogonal transcriptional control	NK.SET library for NK cells; randomized bacterial promoters	Varying strengths; orthogonal sequences; compact size
Heterologous Host Strains [4] [16]	Serve as optimized production chassis	S. albus J1074; M. xanthus DK1622	Genetically tractable; minimal secondary metabolism
Cluster Assembly Systems [19]	Enable modular BGC refactoring	Yeast TAR; modular restriction enzyme approach	Combinatorial assembly; rapid part replacement
Bioinformatics Tools [4] [20]	Predict BGCs and design synthetic elements	antiSMASH; AI-based promoter design models	Genome mining; expression prediction
Expression Reporters [4] [17]	Quantify promoter activity and optimization	Indigoidine (blue pigment); GFP; YFP	Visual screening; high-throughput quantification

Case Studies in Natural Product Discovery

Activation of Silent Nonribosomal Peptide Synthetase (NRPS) Clusters

The marine-derived Streptomyces sp. SCSGAA 0027 possesses 19 predicted NRPS BGCs, none of which were expressed under standard laboratory conditions. Researchers cloned two large silent NRPS BGCs into a BAC vector, replaced native promoters with the engineered kasOp* promoter, and expressed them heterologously in S. albus J1074 [16].

Results: This approach led to the discovery of coprisamides A and B, novel branched cyclic peptides. The yield was significantly enhanced (from 2.5 mg/L to 9.6 mg/L) when cultures were supplemented with 150 mM KCl, which was found to increase kasOp* promoter activity. This demonstrates how promoter engineering combined with simple culture optimization can unlock silent metabolic pathways.

Polyketide Synthase Optimization in Yeast

In Yarrowia lipolytica, researchers refactored a four-gene polyketide synthase cluster for docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) production by systematically testing different promoter combinations and genetic control elements [19].

Approach: The team compared a basic design (TEF promoter only) against optimized clusters incorporating upstream activating sequences (UAS1B), 5' promoter introns, and intergenic spacers.

Results: The optimized cluster with minLEU2 promoter, UAS1B4 elements, and introns increased DHA production 16-fold compared to the basic design (from 1.3% to 17.1% of total fatty acids). The study highlighted the importance of genetic stability, as constructs with extended repetitive UAS1B16 sequences showed instability during prolonged cultivation.

Emerging Technologies and Future Perspectives

Artificial intelligence is revolutionizing promoter design through deep learning models that generate novel synthetic promoters with predetermined expression intensities. The PromoDGDE model combines diffusion processes with generative adversarial networks to create functional promoters for both E. coli and S. cerevisiae, with over 60% of generated sequences showing expected regulatory effects [17]. Community-driven initiatives like the Random Promoter DREAM Challenge have established benchmark datasets and model architectures that significantly improve expression prediction across diverse organisms [20].

Future developments will likely focus on expanding the repertoire of orthogonal regulatory elements with broad host ranges, particularly for underexplored bacterial taxa. The integration of machine learning with high-throughput experimental validation will enable more precise control of metabolic pathway expression, moving beyond simple activation to fine-tuned optimization of biosynthetic fluxes for enhanced compound production.

Activating Silent Pathways and Optimizing Product Yields

Microbial natural products represent an invaluable source of pharmaceuticals, accounting for a significant proportion of clinical drugs for cancer, infectious diseases, and other conditions [21] [22]. However, genome sequencing has revealed that the vast majority of biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs)—the genetic blueprints for these compounds—remain "silent" or "cryptic" under standard laboratory conditions [4] [15]. It is estimated that approximately 90% of native BGCs are not expressed or are only partially transcribed in vitro [4], representing an enormous untapped reservoir of chemical diversity.

Refactoring these silent BGCs through synthetic biology approaches provides a powerful strategy to access this hidden treasure trove. This process involves rewriting genetic elements to bypass native regulatory constraints and optimize expression, frequently coupled with heterologous expression in engineered host chassis [4] [15]. Within this paradigm, synthetic promoters serve as precision tools to control the timing, location, and level of gene expression, thereby activating silent pathways and maximizing product yields.

Core Refactoring Strategies and Quantitative Outcomes

Table 1: Key BGC Refactoring Strategies and Their Performance Outcomes

Refactoring Strategy	Key Features	Reported Outcomes	Applications/Examples
Orthogonal Promoter Engineering	Randomization of both promoter and RBS regions; creates highly orthogonal regulatory cassettes [4].	16-fold increase in DHA production in Yarrowia lipolytica; activation of silent actinorhodin BGC in Streptomyces albus [4] [19].	Refactoring of multi-operon BGCs in actinomycetes; optimization of PUFA synthase clusters [4] [19].
Metagenomic Promoter Mining	Identification of natural 5' regulatory elements from diverse, untapped bacterial taxa [4].	Library of 184 regulatory elements with varying sequence composition and orthogonal host ranges [4].	Enabling BGC expression across phylogenetically diverse hosts; expanding source potential beyond typical model organisms [4].
Stabilized Promoter Systems	Engineered promoters (e.g., using TALEs-based iFFL) maintain constant expression levels despite copy number variation or growth conditions [4].	Near-identical titers of target compounds when BGCs were moved between high-copy plasmids and host genomes [4].	Ensuring reliable pathway expression in diverse genetic contexts; reducing performance variability due to metabolic burden [4].
DIAL System	Utilizes spacer length and recombinase excision sites to fine-tune the distance between promoter and gene, creating programmable set points [23].	Achieved uniform "high," "med," "low," and "off" expression levels across a cell population; enhanced conversion of fibroblasts to neurons [23].	Fine-tuning therapeutic gene expression in gene therapy; systematic study of transcription factor levels in cell reprogramming [23].

Detailed Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Multiplexed Promoter Replacement via CRISPR-TAR

This protocol describes a method for the simultaneous replacement of multiple native promoters in a biosynthetic gene cluster with synthetic, constitutive counterparts to activate silent pathways [4].

Materials

• Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain (e.g., BY4741) proficient in homologous recombination.
• CRISPR-TAR assembly system (e.g., mCRISTAR, miCRISTAR, or mpCRISTAR vectors).
• Donor DNA fragments containing synthetic promoters (e.g., from a randomized library [4]).
• BGC-specific gRNA expression constructs.
• Appropriate selective media (e.g., SD/-Ura).

Procedure

• gRNA Design: Design and clone 2-8 gRNAs targeting the promoter regions upstream of each essential gene within the silent BGC.
• Donor Preparation: Synthesize or amplify donor DNA fragments for each promoter swap. Each fragment should contain the desired synthetic promoter flanked by ~40 bp homology arms matching the sequences immediately upstream and downstream of the native promoter to be replaced.
• Co-transformation: Co-transform the BGC-containing vector, the pool of gRNA constructs, and the donor DNA fragments into the yeast strain using a standard lithium acetate protocol.
• Selection and Screening: Plate the transformation mixture onto selective media. Screen resulting colonies by colony PCR using primers flanking the promoter insertion sites to verify successful replacements.
• Heterologous Expression: Isolate the refactored BGC DNA from yeast and transform it into a suitable heterologous expression host (e.g., Streptomyces albus). Screen for metabolite production via LC-MS or bioactivity assays.

Protocol 2: Combinatorial Optimization of a Multi-Gene Cluster

This protocol outlines a modular cloning approach to systematically test different genetic control elements (promoters, enhancers, introns) to maximize product yield from a heterologously expressed BGC, as demonstrated for DHA production [19].

Materials

• Modular cloning system with unique restriction enzymes (e.g., SmaI, SdaI, ApaLI, AclI, AvrII, PacI, NotI).
• Library of genetic parts: core promoters (e.g., TEF, minLEU2), upstream activating sequences (UAS1B), 5' introns, terminators.
• Assembly vector and E. coli cloning strain.
• Target heterologous host (e.g., Yarrowia lipolytica Po1h).

Procedure

• Cassette Assembly:
  • For each gene in the BGC, create promoter-gene-terminator cassettes in individual plasmids. Use restriction digestion and ligation to combine a promoter, the gene, and a terminator into a single unit.
• Combinatorial Cluster Construction:
  • Assemble the full BGC by sequentially cloning the individual cassettes into an assembly vector in the correct order, using the unique restriction sites.
  • Create multiple cluster variants by swapping genetic parts (e.g., testing TEF vs. minLEU2 promoters, adding blocks of UAS1B enhancers, inserting 5' introns).
• Host Integration and Screening:
  • Release the final cluster from the assembly vector and integrate it into the genome of the heterologous host.
  • Cultivate the resulting strains in a defined medium (e.g., glycerol-based minimal medium).
  • Monitor growth and product formation over time (e.g., 185 hours). Analyze final product yields using GC-MS for compounds like fatty acids or LC-MS for other natural products.
• Stability Assessment: Passage the high-producing strains repeatedly and reassess production to ensure genetic stability, as long repetitive enhancer sequences can sometimes cause instability [19].

The logical workflow for this combinatorial optimization is summarized in the diagram below.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 2: Key Reagents for BGC Refactoring with Synthetic Promoters

Reagent / Tool	Function in Refactoring	Specific Examples
Bioinformatics Platforms	In silico identification of BGCs and design of synthetic regulatory elements.	antiSMASH [4] [22], PRISM [4], MIBiG [4] [22], chromatinLENS [24], PromPT [25].
Synthetic Promoter Libraries	Provide a diverse set of parts to control transcription initiation strength and specificity.	Completely randomized bacterial promoters [4], metagenomically-mined natural promoters [4], tissue-specific eukaryotic promoters [26] [24].
Modular Cloning Systems	Enable rapid, combinatorial assembly of genetic parts and multi-gene clusters.	Systems using unique restriction enzymes (e.g., SmaI, NotI) [19], Golden Gate assembly.
CRISPR-Based Editing Tools	Facilitate precise, multiplexed genome editing and promoter replacements within BGCs.	mCRISTAR, miCRISTAR, mpCRISTAR [4].
Optimized Heterologous Hosts	Provide a clean genetic background and optimized metabolism for BGC expression.	Streptomyces albus chassis strains [4], Yarrowia lipolytica [19].

Visualizing the Promoter Engineering Workflow

The process of designing and implementing synthetic promoters for pathway activation follows a systematic workflow, from computational design to functional validation in a production host. This pipeline integrates multiple cutting-edge technologies to achieve precise control over gene expression.

The strategic refactoring of biosynthetic gene clusters using synthetic promoters has revolutionized the field of natural product discovery. By moving beyond native regulatory constraints, researchers can now systematically activate silent pathways and push product yields to industrially viable levels. The continued development of more sophisticated, stable, and tunable promoter systems—powered by machine learning and high-throughput screening—will further accelerate the discovery and development of novel therapeutic agents to address pressing medical needs. These protocols and strategies provide a foundational toolkit for researchers aiming to harness the full potential of microbial genomic diversity.

The Refactoring Toolbox: From CRISPR to AI-Driven Design

The discovery of microbial natural products has long been a vital source of pharmaceuticals, yielding compounds with diverse bioactivities that serve as antibiotics, antitumor agents, and immunosuppressants [8]. However, a significant challenge persists: the majority of biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) responsible for producing these valuable molecules remain transcriptionally silent under standard laboratory conditions [8] [27]. Synthetic biology approaches that "refactor" these BGCs by replacing native promoters with well-characterized synthetic counterparts have emerged as a powerful strategy to activate silent clusters and enhance product yields [8]. This application note details two advanced CRISPR-enhanced workflows—CRISETR and mCRISTAR—that enable efficient, multiplexed promoter engineering of natural product BGCs, providing researchers with robust tools to accelerate natural product discovery and development.

The following table compares the core features of the CRISETR and mCRISTAR systems to guide platform selection.

Table 1: Comparison of CRISETR and mCRISTAR Platforms

Feature	CRISETR	mCRISTAR
Full Name	CRISPR/Cas9 and RecET-mediated Refactoring	multiplexed CRISPR/Cas9 and Transformation-Associated Recombination
Year Developed	2024 [8]	2016 [27] [28]
Core Mechanism	RecET homologous recombination + CRISPR/Cas9	Yeast homologous recombination (TAR) + CRISPR/Cas9
Primary Host	Escherichia coli [8]	Saccharomyces cerevisiae (yeast) [27]
Key Advantage	Enhanced tolerance to repetitive sequences; suitable for large, complex BGCs [8]	Simplified cloning via CRISPR arrays; cost-effective [27]
Multiplexing Capacity	Demonstrated simultaneous replacement of four promoters [8]	Capable of replacing multiple promoters using single auxotrophic marker [27]
Documented Efficiency	20.4-fold yield improvement (daptomycin) [8]	Successful refactoring of tetarimycin cluster [27]

CRISETR Protocol

The CRISETR protocol combines the efficiency of RecET-mediated homologous recombination with the precision of CRISPR/Cas9 to refactor BGCs directly in E. coli.

Detailed Experimental Procedure

Promoter Cassette and gRNA Design

• Promoter Cassettes: Design linear DNA cassettes containing your synthetic promoters flanked by 500-1000 bp homology arms specific to each target insertion site within the BGC [8].
• gRNA Design: Design CRISPR gRNAs to target the native promoter regions for cleavage. Select unique 20 bp target sites adjacent to 5'-NGG-3' PAM sequences within each promoter region [8] [27].

Bacterial Transformation

• Use E. coli GB05-dir harboring the pSC101-BAD-ETgA-tet plasmid (expressing full-length recE, recT, redγ, and recA under arabinose-inducible P_BAD promoter) as the host strain [8].
• Co-transform the target BGC (cloned in an appropriate shuttle vector) with the CRISPR/Cas9 plasmid (pRCas9) and gRNA plasmid (pSgRNA) using standard E. coli transformation protocols [8].
• Plate transformed cells on LB medium with appropriate antibiotics and incubate at 30°C overnight [8].

Induction and Recombination

• Inoculate single colonies into liquid LB medium with appropriate antibiotics and grow to mid-log phase (OD₆₀₀ ≈ 0.5-0.6) at 30°C [8].
• Add L-arabinose to a final concentration of 0.2% (w/v) to induce RecET expression and initiate homologous recombination [8].
• Incubate cultures for 4-6 hours post-induction to allow for complete recombination events [8].

Screening and Validation

• Isolate plasmid DNA from induced cultures and transform into suitable Streptomyces hosts (e.g., Streptomyces coelicolor A3(2) or M1154) via intergeneric conjugation using E. coli ET12567/pUZ8002 [8].
• Screen exconjugants on appropriate media containing antibiotics (e.g., apramycin 25 μg/mL) and nalidixic acid (25 μg/mL) to select for successful recombinants [8].
• Validate promoter replacements by colony PCR and Sanger sequencing across all modified junctions [8].

Key Achievements and Performance Data

The CRISETR platform has demonstrated remarkable efficacy in refactoring complex BGCs, as evidenced by the following quantitative performance data.

Table 2: CRISETR Performance Metrics in BGC Refactoring

Application	BGC Size	Editing Efficiency	Product Yield Enhancement
Proof-of-Concept	Not specified	Simultaneous replacement of 4 promoter sites; Marker-free single promoter replacement	Not quantified [8]
Daptomycin BGC	74 kb	Successful combinatorial promoter replacement	20.4-fold increase in heterologous production [8]
General Performance	Up to 200 kb (theoretical)	Enhanced tolerance to direct repeat sequences	Enables activation of silent BGCs [8]

mCRISTAR Protocol

mCRISTAR utilizes yeast homologous recombination combined with CRISPR/Cas9 cleavage to refactor BGCs in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Detailed Experimental Procedure

Promoter Cassette and CRISPR Array Design

• Promoter Cassettes: Design promoter cassettes containing well-characterized constitutive or inducible promoters (e.g., ermE*) fused with auxotrophic markers (URA3, LEU2, MET15, TRP1, HIS3, LYS2) [27]. Flank these cassettes with 40 bp homology sequences specific to each target promoter region in the BGC [27].
• CRISPR Array: Identify unique 20 bp target sequences within each native promoter region of the BGC, ensuring each is adjacent to a 5'-NGG-3' PAM sequence [27]. Synthesize a CRISPR array containing these target sequences separated by direct repeat sequences [27].

Yeast Transformation and Selection

• Clone the synthesized CRISPR array into the iCas9/tracrRNA expression plasmid pCRCT to create pCRCT:[BGC-name] [27].
• Transform pCRCT:[BGC-name] into competent S. cerevisiae cells and select transformants on synthetic complete (SC) medium lacking uracil (SC -Ura) [27].
• In a second transformation step, introduce the BGC cloned in an E. coli:yeast:Streptomyces shuttle vector (e.g., pTARa) along with the PCR-generated promoter cassettes into the yeast strain containing pCRCT:[BGC-name] [27].
• Plate the double-transformed yeast on appropriate SC dropout plates that select for all introduced auxotrophic markers to identify successful recombinants [27].

Validation and Heterologous Expression

• Isolate the refactored BGC plasmid from yeast and transform into E. coli for amplification [27].
• Introduce the validated refactored BGC into appropriate Streptomyces hosts (e.g., Streptomyces albus for the tetarimycin cluster) via intergeneric conjugation [27].
• Culture the recombinant strains under standard fermentation conditions and analyze metabolite production using HPLC or LC-MS to confirm activation of the target BGC [27].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Successful implementation of CRISETR and mCRISTAR workflows requires the following key reagents and genetic components.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for CRISETR and mCRISTAR Workflows

Reagent/Component	Function	Example Sources/References
E. coli GB05-dir	Host for CRISETR; expresses RecET recombinase system	[8]
pSC101-BAD-ETgA-tet	Plasmid encoding RecET system under arabinose control	[8]
S. cerevisiae	Host for mCRISTAR; provides efficient homologous recombination	[27]
Cas9 Nuclease	RNA-guided endonuclease for targeted DNA cleavage	[8] [27]
Synthetic Promoter Libraries	Well-characterized promoters for transcriptional tuning	[8]
Auxotrophic Markers	Selection system in yeast (URA3, LEU2, HIS3, etc.)	[27]
BGC Shuttle Vectors	Enable transfer between E. coli, yeast, and Streptomyces	[8] [27]

CRISETR and mCRISTAR represent significant advancements in multiplexed CRISPR technologies for BGC refactoring. CRISETR offers particular advantages for handling large, complex BGCs with repetitive elements directly in E. coli, while mCRISTAR provides a streamlined, cost-effective approach in yeast. Both systems enable researchers to overcome the fundamental challenge of silent BGCs, opening new avenues for natural product discovery and development. The detailed protocols provided herein serve as comprehensive guides for implementing these technologies in diverse research settings, empowering scientists to harness the full potential of synthetic biology for natural product research.

Advanced Chassis and Heterologous Hosts for Cluster Expression

The exploration of microbial natural products (NPs) has long been a cornerstone of drug discovery, yielding compounds with indispensable applications in human medicine, animal health, and crop protection [4]. However, traditional discovery platforms increasingly lead to the rediscovery of known compounds, creating a pressing need for innovative approaches to access novel chemical diversity [4] [29]. The rapid expansion of genomic and metagenomic sequencing has revealed a vast reservoir of biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) encoding potential new NPs, yet a significant majority of these BGCs remain functionally inaccessible—or "silent"—under standard laboratory fermentation conditions [4].

Heterologous expression, the process of expressing a BGC in a host organism that does not naturally contain it, has emerged as a powerful synthetic biology solution to this challenge [30]. This approach decouples pathway expression from the native, often complex, regulatory networks of the original producer, thereby activating silent BGCs. Furthermore, it enables the study and production of NPs from uncultivable or fastidious microorganisms in more tractable laboratory chassis [4] [29]. The success of this strategy hinges on two critical, interdependent components: the development of advanced chassis with optimized cellular machinery for biosynthetic pathway expression and the implementation of sophisticated refactoring protocols to rewrite genetic clusters for optimal function in these new hosts [4] [31]. This document, framed within a broader thesis on refactoring NPs with synthetic promoters, provides detailed application notes and experimental protocols for researchers aiming to leverage these technologies for natural product discovery and development.

Host Platform Selection: A Comparative Analysis

Selecting an appropriate heterologous host is a foundational decision. The ideal chassis should be genetically tractable, support the expression of large multi-gene clusters, provide ample metabolic precursors, and possess the necessary cellular machinery for proper protein folding and post-translational modifications [29]. No single host is universally optimal; the choice must be tailored to the specific BGC's origin and requirements.

Table 1: Comparison of Common Heterologous Expression Hosts

Host Organism	Best For	Key Advantages	Key Limitations	Production Example
Streptomyces spp. (e.g., S. albus, S. coelicolor, S. lividans, S. aureofaciens Chassis2.0) [32] [33] [31]	Bacterial Type I & II PKS, NRPS, and other actinobacterial BGCs [33]	Native ability to produce complex NPs; rich genetic tools; high chassis compatibility for actinobacterial clusters [32]	Can be slow-growing; genetic manipulation can be complex [33]	Oxytetracycline (370% increase) [33], Actinorhodin [33], Spectinabilin [31]
Escherichia coli [29] [34] [30]	Simple metabolic pathways, terpenoids; Type I PKS (with engineering) [33]	Rapid growth; well-understood genetics; extensive molecular tool kit; high protein yield [30]	Lack of eukaryotic PTMs; difficulty expressing large, GC-rich clusters; often insoluble expression of minimal PKS [33]	6-Deoxyerythronolide B (Type I PKS core) [33]
Saccharomyces cerevisiae [34] [30]	Fungal BGCs, isoprenoids, eukaryotic membrane proteins [34]	Eukaryotic PTMs; GRAS status; efficient protein secretion; advanced synthetic biology tools [34]	Hyper-mannosylation; relatively slow growth; expensive media [34] [30]	Medicinal proteins (e.g., vaccines, hormones) [34]
Bacillus subtilis [30]	Secretion of prokaryotic proteins [30]	Efficient protein secretion; GRAS potential; no LPS production [30]	Production of degradative proteases; potential low expression [30]	Industrial enzymes [30]

Recent advances have moved beyond conventional model hosts towards specialized, high-performance chassis. For instance, the development of Streptomyces aureofaciens Chassis2.0 exemplifies this trend. Derived from a high-yield chlortetracycline producer, this chassis was created by performing an in-frame deletion of two endogenous T2PKS gene clusters to eliminate precursor competition [33]. This engineered host demonstrated superior performance, achieving a 370% increase in oxytetracycline production compared to commercial strains and efficiently producing diverse polyketides like actinorhodin and the novel compound TLN-1 [33].

Refactoring and Synthetic Biology Toolkits

BGC refactoring involves the systematic replacement of a cluster's native regulatory elements with well-characterized, orthogonal parts to ensure predictable and high-level expression in the heterologous host. This process is crucial for bypassing native, host-specific regulation that often silences BGCs in non-native contexts [4] [31].

Key Transcriptional Regulatory Modules

The core of refactoring lies in the use of synthetic promoter systems. Different design strategies yield promoters with varying strengths and applications:

• Completely Randomized Synthetic Promoters: A library of highly orthogonal regulatory cassettes for Streptomyces was created by randomizing sequences in both the promoter and ribosomal binding site (RBS) regions, only partially fixing the -10/-35 boxes and the Shine-Dalgarno sequence. This strategy was used to replace seven native promoters in the actinorhodin BGC, activating its production in a minimal medium [4].
• Metagenomically-Mined Promoters: To access a wider phylogenetic breadth, a diverse library of natural 5' regulatory elements was mined from 184 microbial genomes across Actinobacteria, Archaea, and other phyla. This provides a rich resource of promoters with varying sequence composition and broad host ranges [4].
• Stabilized Promoters: For consistent expression despite genetic or environmental fluctuations, engineered promoters incorporating a TALEs-based incoherent feedforward loop (iFFL) have been developed for E. coli. These "constant" promoters maintain near-identical expression levels regardless of the gene's copy number or genomic location [4].

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

A successful heterologous expression project relies on a suite of specialized molecular biology reagents.

Table 2: Key Research Reagents for BGC Refactoring and Expression

Reagent / Tool Type	Specific Examples	Function in Heterologous Expression
Strong Constitutive Promoters	gapdhp (S. griseus), rpsLp (S. griseus), ermE*p [31]	Drives high-level, constitutive transcription of refactored BGC genes in the heterologous host.
Cloning & Assembly Systems	ExoCET [33], DNA assembler / Yeast Homologous Recombination (YHR) [31], mCRISTAR/miCRISTAR [4]	Enables seamless assembly of large, refactored BGCs into shuttle vectors for transformation into the host.
Shuttle Vectors	p15A_oxy (E. coli-Streptomyces) [33], YIp/YCp/YEp (S. cerevisiae) [34]	Maintains and replicates the refactored BGC DNA across the cloning host (E. coli) and the final expression host.
Gene Editing Tools	CRISPR/Cas9 for S. cerevisiae [34] and Streptomyces [32]	Used for precise genome engineering of the heterologous host, e.g., deleting competing gene clusters.
Reporter Genes	xylE (catechol 2,3-dioxygenase) [31]	Quantitatively measures promoter activity and efficiency in the target host to screen functional parts.

Detailed Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Multiplexed Promoter Replacement via miCRISTAR

This protocol allows for the simultaneous replacement of multiple native promoters in a cloned BGC with synthetic counterparts, a process critical for activating silent clusters [4].

Applications: Activation of silent BGCs; optimization of flux through biosynthetic pathways. Reagents: Cloned BGC in a yeast-E. coli-streptomyces shuttle vector; PCR reagents; synthetic DNA fragments containing orthogonal promoters with flanking homology arms (40-50 bp) to target genes; miCRISTAR gRNA oligonucleotides; in vitro CRISPR/Cas9 reagents; Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain for assembly (e.g., S. cerevisiae HVD100); E. coli for plasmid enrichment; electrocompetent cells of the target Streptomyces host.

Procedure:

• gRNA Design & Synthesis: Design and synthesize guide RNAs (gRNAs) targeting the sequence immediately upstream of each native promoter to be replaced.
• Promoter Fragment Preparation: Amplify or synthesize the desired orthogonal promoter modules. Each module must be flanked by homology arms (40-50 bp) that are complementary to the regions immediately downstream of the gRNA cut site and upstream of the next gene's start codon.
• In Vitro CRISPR Digestion: Set up an in vitro CRISPR/Cas9 reaction to linearize the parent BGC-containing vector at all promoter locations simultaneously using the synthesized gRNAs.
• Yeast Homologous Recombination: Co-transform the linearized vector and the promoter modules into S. cerevisiae. The yeast's highly efficient homologous recombination machinery will assemble the promoter modules into the correct locations, rebuilding a circular plasmid.
• Plasmid Recovery & Verification: Recover the assembled plasmid from yeast, transform into E. coli for enrichment, and isolate the plasmid DNA. Verify the correct assembly via diagnostic PCR and sequencing.
• Heterologous Expression: Introduce the verified, refactored BGC construct into the final Streptomyces expression host via intergeneric conjugation or protoplast transformation. Screen for compound production under standard cultivation conditions.

Protocol 2: De Novo Refactoring of a Silent BGC Using a Plug-and-Play Scaffold

This protocol describes a comprehensive strategy to completely refactor a silent BGC, decoupling it from all native regulation [31].

Applications: Awakening completely silent BGCs where no production is detected in the native or heterologous host. Reagents: Genomic DNA from native organism (or synthetic genes); PCR reagents; a library of strong, validated promoters for the target host (e.g., gapdhp, rpsLp from various actinobacteria); yeast assembly vector backbone; Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain for assembly.

Procedure:

• Module Design:
  • Promoter Modules: Select a set of strong, orthogonal promoters with low sequence homology to avoid homologous recombination during assembly.
  • Gene Modules: Define each open reading frame (ORF) of the BGC, including its native ribosomal binding site (if functional in the host) or a redesigned RBS, and any suspected native terminator sequences downstream of the gene.
  • Helper Modules: Prepare the vector backbone containing an origin of replication and selection marker for the assembly host (yeast), the DNA enrichment host (E. coli), and the final expression host (e.g., Streptomyces).
• Fragment Amplification: Amplify all modules via PCR, ensuring each fragment has 40-50 bp overlapping ends with its adjacent modules for in vivo yeast recombination.
• One-Step Yeast Assembly: Co-transform all promoter, gene, and helper modules into S. cerevisiae in a single transformation event. The yeast machinery will assemble the fragments into a complete, refactored BGC on a single shuttle vector.
• Validation and Expression: Follow Steps 5 and 6 from Protocol 4.1 to recover the plasmid, verify its sequence, and express it in the heterologous host. The constitutive promoters should drive transcription of all essential genes, potentially awakening the silent pathway as was demonstrated for the spectinabilin BGC [31].

Protocol 3: Engineering a High-PerformanceStreptomycesChassis

This protocol outlines the creation of a specialized chassis, like Chassis2.0, optimized for the production of specific classes of natural products, such as type II polyketides [33].

Applications: Creating a dedicated, high-yielding host platform for a family of NPs to streamline discovery and production. Reagents: A high-producing industrial Streptomyces strain (e.g., S. aureofaciens J1-022); gene editing tools (e.g., CRISPR-Cas9 or REDIRECT kit); primers for gene cluster deletion; culture media (TSB, SFM, etc.).

Procedure:

• Host Selection: Identify a native high-yielding industrial producer that exhibits robust growth, genetic stability, and shorter fermentation cycles. S. aureofaciens J1-022 was selected over S. rimosus for these reasons [33].
• Identify Target Clusters: Annotate the genome of the selected host and identify endogenous BGCs that compete for key biosynthetic precursors (e.g., malonyl-CoA).
• In-Frame Deletion: Design and perform an in-frame deletion of the targeted endogenous BGC(s) using a gene knockout system. This creates a "pigment-faded" or "metabolically-primed" host, freeing up precursor flux for heterologously expressed pathways.
• Chassis Validation: Test the performance of the engineered chassis by introducing well-characterized BGCs (e.g., for oxytetracycline or actinorhodin) and quantitatively comparing production titers to those in standard model hosts (e.g., S. albus J1074, S. lividans TK24). Chassis2.0 demonstrated a 370% increase in OTC production [33].

Workflow Visualization

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow and key decision points for a heterologous expression project, from initial cluster selection to final compound analysis.

Heterologous Expression Project Workflow

Concluding Remarks

The strategic combination of advanced heterologous chassis and sophisticated refactoring protocols represents a paradigm shift in natural product discovery. By moving BGCs into optimized cellular environments and rewriting their genetic code for predictable expression, researchers can systematically access the vast reservoir of silent biosynthetic potential encoded in microbial genomes [4] [33]. The quantitative data and detailed protocols provided here serve as a practical guide for implementing these powerful strategies. As synthetic biology tools continue to advance, particularly in genome engineering and host chassis development, the efficiency and scope of heterologous expression will expand further, solidifying its role as an indispensable platform for the next generation of drug discovery and biosynthetic engineering.

Modular DNA Assembly Toolkits for Flexible Cluster Engineering

The discovery of novel natural products (NPs) is paramount for addressing emerging challenges in human medicine and agriculture. Genomic sequencing has revealed a vast reservoir of biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) in microbial organisms, encoding pathways for potentially valuable compounds. However, a significant majority of these BGCs are silent or poorly expressed under standard laboratory conditions, presenting a major bottleneck in NP discovery [35] [36]. Refactoring these silent BGCs by replacing their native regulatory elements with synthetic, well-characterized parts provides a powerful solution to this problem. This application note details the use of a modular DNA assembly toolkit, developed for Streptomyces, to systematically refactor BGCs. The toolkit is designed for flexibility and versatility, enabling researchers to replace native promoters and employ various DNA assembly methods to activate silent gene clusters and optimize the production of target metabolites [37]. The protocols herein are framed within a broader research context aimed at decoupling BGC expression from complex native regulation, thereby providing a generalizable platform for NP discovery [4] [31].

Toolkit Architecture and Core Components

The modular DNA assembly toolkit is built upon the principle of standardization, allowing for the interchangeable use of genetic parts to construct synthetic BGCs. Its architecture is compatible with several modern DNA assembly techniques, including BioBrick, Golden Gate, CATCH, and yeast homologous recombination, providing researchers with the flexibility to handle genetic parts and refactor clusters of varying sizes [37].

Key Functional Modules

The toolkit comprises several key modules that facilitate the entire workflow from part assembly to heterologous expression:

• Promoter Modules: A library of constitutive and inducible promoters for strong, predictable gene expression.
• Gene Modules: Coding sequences for biosynthetic enzymes, which can be plugged into the assembly scaffold.
• Helper Modules: Genetic elements for DNA maintenance and replication in different hosts (e.g., E. coli, S. cerevisiae, and the final Streptomyces expression host) [31].
• Assembly Modules: Vectors and linkers compatible with the chosen DNA assembly method (e.g., Golden Gate), often featuring standardized overhangs for hierarchical construction [37] [38].

This modular design supports the refactoring of entire BGCs by systematically replacing native promoters with a set of orthogonal synthetic promoters, thereby removing the cluster from its native regulatory context and placing it under external control [4] [31].

Research Reagent Solutions

Table 1: Essential Research Reagents for Toolkit Implementation

Reagent / Material	Function / Application	Key Features / Examples
pPAS-PT Vector Series	Basic vector for promoter testing and part assembly.	Compatible with Golden Gate assembly; used for constructing promoter-reporter fusions [37].
pPAB-HR Vector	Capture vector for cloning large gene clusters via homology recombination.	Used with CATCH method; contains homology arms for targeted cluster capture [37].
Synthetic Promoter Library	Drives constitutive or inducible expression of refactored genes.	Includes strong promoters like gapdhp and rpsLp; activities quantified relative to ermE*p [31].
E. coli EPI300	Host for molecular cloning and plasmid propagation.	General purpose cloning strain [37].
E. coli ET12567/pUZ8002	Donor strain for intergeneric conjugation with Streptomyces.	Facilitates plasmid transfer from E. coli to Streptomyces [37].
S. cerevisiae VL6-48	Host for in vivo assembly of large DNA constructs via homologous recombination.	Used in methods like miCRISTAR for multi-part DNA assembly [37].
Cas9 Enzyme & sgRNAs	For CRISPR/Cas9-mediated digestion of genomic DNA and cluster editing.	Enables precise linearization of genomic DNA plugs for CATCH cloning and subsequent cluster engineering [37].

Application Notes: Refactoring the Actinorhodin (act) Gene Cluster

To demonstrate the utility of the toolkit, the well-characterized actinorhodin (act) BGC from Streptomyces coelicolor was refactored. The native cluster was cloned and its regulatory elements were replaced with synthetic promoters from the toolkit to enhance production.

Quantitative Analysis of Refactoring Outcomes

Table 2: Quantitative Data from Promoter Characterization and Cluster Refactoring

Experiment / Element	Measurement / Outcome	Notes / Control for Comparison
Promoter Strength (XylE Assay)	>10-fold higher activity for 13/36 tested promoters	Compared to ermE*p, a strong constitutive promoter [31].
T7 Promoter System	Strong, cumate-inducible sfGFP expression	System included a codon-optimized T7 RNAP; compared to kasOp* positive control [37].
act Cluster Refactoring	Increased actinorhodin production	Achieved by replacing native promoters in the act cluster with strong, synthetic promoters from the toolkit [37].

Experimental Protocol: Cloning and Refactoring a Gene Cluster

This protocol details the process from cloning a target BGC to refactoring its promoters for activation or yield optimization.

Protocol 1: Cloning a Gene Cluster Using the CATCH Method

Purpose: To isolate a large gene cluster directly from genomic DNA and clone it into a suitable vector for subsequent manipulation. Reagents: Genomic DNA from target strain (e.g., S. coelicolor M145), pPAB-HR capture vector, Cas9 enzyme, sgRNAs, Gibson assembly mix, E. coli EPI300 electrocompetent cells. Workflow:

• Genomic DNA Preparation: Cultivate the source strain for 2 days and collect mycelia. Prepare high-molecular-weight genomic DNA plugs using a commercial kit (e.g., CHEF genomic DNA plug kit, Bio-Rad) [37].
• sgRNA Preparation: Design two sgRNAs that flank the target gene cluster (e.g., the act cluster). Generate DNA templates for in vitro transcription of sgRNA-actF and sgRNA-actR using overlap extension PCR. Perform in vitro transcription using a commercial kit (e.g., HiScribe T7 Quick High Yield RNA Synthesis Kit, NEB) [37].
• In Vitro Cas9 Digestion: Digest the genomic DNA plugs with a mixture of purified Cas9 enzyme (500 ng) and the two sgRNAs (500 ng each) at 37°C for 2 hours. This linearizes the genomic DNA, releasing the target cluster fragment [37].
• Vector Preparation: Linearize the pPAB-HR capture vector by digestion with AarI. The vector is designed with ~30 bp homology arms corresponding to the ends of the target cluster fragment [37].
• Gibson Assembly: Assemble the digested genomic fragment (1 µg) with the linearized pPAB-HR backbone (50 ng) using a Gibson assembly reaction.
• Transformation and Verification: Introduce the assembly mixture into E. coli EPI300 by electroporation. Screen for correct clones by colony PCR using primers (e.g., PF-1 & PR-1, PF-2 & PR-2) that span the vector-insert junctions. Confirm the final recombinant plasmid by restriction digestion (e.g., with I-SceI) [37].

Diagram 1: CATCH method workflow for cloning gene clusters.

Protocol 2: Refactoring a Gene Cluster via Multiplexed Promoter Replacement

Purpose: To replace multiple native promoters within a cloned BGC with synthetic, strong promoters to activate or enhance expression. Reagents: Cloned BGC in pPAB vector (e.g., pPAB-act), sgRNAs targeting promoter regions, yeast autotrophic marker (e.g., URA), synthesized promoter cassettes, S. cerevisiae VL6-48, Frozen-EZ Yeast Transformation II Kit. Workflow:

• Target Selection: Select CRISPR target sequences within the promoter regions to be replaced (e.g., three promoters in the act cluster) and one target in the plasmid backbone for inserting a selectable marker. Synthesize the corresponding sgRNAs [37].
• Plasmid Digestion: Digest the pPAB-act plasmid (10 µg) with Cas9 complexed with the sgRNAs. This creates double-strand breaks at the target promoter sites and the marker insertion site [37].
• Promoter Cassette Preparation: Synthesize promoter cassettes with flanking homology arms (40-50 bp) complementary to the regions upstream and downstream of the Cas9 cut sites. Amplify the yeast autotrophic marker (URA) and promoter cassettes by PCR [37].
• Yeast Recombination: Co-transform the purified, digested pPAB-act fragments (1 µg) and the promoter cassette PCR products (150-300 ng) into S. cerevisiae VL6-48 using a yeast transformation kit. The yeast's highly efficient homologous recombination machinery will assemble the fragments, swapping the native promoters for the synthetic ones [37].
• Screening and Verification: Screen yeast colonies for correct promoter insertion by colony PCR using primers that flank the integration sites. Isolate the plasmid DNA from yeast and transform into E. coli for propagation and final sequence verification [37].

Diagram 2: Promoter replacement workflow via yeast recombination.

Discussion and Outlook

The modular DNA assembly toolkit presented here represents a significant advancement in the synthetic biology-driven refactoring of NP BGCs. By providing a standardized, flexible system for part assembly and promoter engineering, it overcomes the historical limitations of case-by-case cluster activation [37] [31]. The successful refactoring of the act cluster underscores the toolkit's practical utility in boosting the production of known metabolites.

Future developments in this field are increasingly organized within the Design-Build-Test-Learn (DBTL) cycle [39] [36]. In the Design phase, AI and machine learning are being leveraged to predict domain compatibility and design optimal synthetic interfaces for more efficient chimeric megasynthases [39] [35]. The Build phase is being accelerated by biofoundries that automate DNA assembly, enabling high-throughput construction of pathway variants [39]. The Test phase relies on advanced analytical methods like mass spectrometry to rapidly quantify metabolites from engineered strains [35]. Finally, data from these tests feed into the Learn phase, where computational models are refined to inform the next DBTL cycle, creating a virtuous loop for continuous improvement in pathway engineering [39] [36]. Integrating the modular toolkit described here into such an automated DBTL framework will further accelerate the discovery and optimization of novel natural products.

The refactoring of natural product biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) is a cornerstone of modern synthetic biology approaches to drug discovery. A significant challenge in this field is that a majority of these BGCs are transcriptionally silent under standard laboratory conditions. This application note details the development and implementation of novel promoter libraries that overcome this limitation. We summarize recent advances in orthogonal transcriptional modules, metagenomically-sourced regulatory elements, and engineered systems with stabilized expression profiles. Structured protocols and quantitative data are provided to enable researchers to integrate these tools into their workflows for activating silent BGCs and optimizing natural product titers.

Microbial natural products (NPs) and their derivatives have been paramount in human medicine, animal health, and crop protection. However, large-scale genomic mining has revealed a vast discrepancy between the number of encoded biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) and the known molecules they produce, with an estimated 90% of native BGCs remaining silent under standard laboratory fermentation conditions [4]. Heterologous expression of refactored BGCs provides a powerful synthetic biology approach to access this untapped chemical diversity.

Promoter engineering serves as a critical intervention point in this process. By replacing native, silent promoters with well-characterized regulatory elements, researchers can disrupt native transcriptional regulation and activate silent BGCs [4] [40]. The evolution of promoter libraries has progressed from simple randomized spacers to sophisticated systems designed for orthogonality, host-specificity, and predictable performance. This note details the concepts, applications, and protocols for utilizing these next-generation promoter libraries in the context of refactoring natural product BGCs.

Concepts and Library Architectures

Orthogonal Synthetic Promoter Libraries

Traditional synthetic promoter libraries (SPLs) often randomize only the spacer between the -35 and -10 consensus regions. A key advance involves the complete randomization of sequences in both the promoter and ribosomal binding site (RBS) regions to achieve high orthogonality.

• Design Principle: The regulatory sequences, including both the promoter and RBS, are completely randomized, with only the core -10/-35 regions and the Shine-Dalgarno (SD) sequence partially fixed [4].
• Advantage: This design generates a large pool of highly orthogonal regulatory cassettes with varying strengths (strong, medium, weak), which is crucial for the multiplexed engineering of BGCs containing multiple operons. This approach minimizes homologous recombination between promoters within a refactored cluster [4].
• Application Example: When the seven native promoters of the silent actinorhodin (ACT) BGC from Streptomyces coelicolor were replaced with four strong orthogonal cassettes, the refactored cluster was successfully activated in the heterologous host Streptomyces albus J1074 [4].

Metagenomically-Mined Promoter Libraries

To escape the limited phylogenetic breadth of traditional model organisms, researchers have turned to metagenomic mining for regulatory elements with universal or host-specific functions.

• Source Material: 184 prokaryotic genomes spanning Actinobacteria, Archaea, Bacteroidetes, Cyanobacteria, Firmicutes, Proteobacteria, and Spirochetes were mined, yielding 29,249 uniquely barcoded regulatory sequences (RSs) [41].
• Host Compatibility: Characterization in Bacillus subtilis, Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa revealed distinct activity patterns. The fraction of active RSs correlated with the host's genomic GC content: P. aeruginosa (66% GC) activated 83.8% of RSs, E. coli (50% GC) activated 52.0%, and B. subtilis (42% GC) activated 18.9% [41].
• Specificity Groups: The library contained sequences that were universally active (16.9%), differentially active in two species (33.3%), specific to one species (37.4%), or inactive in all (12.4%) [41]. This allows for the design of programmable species-selective gene expression.

Engineered Stabilized and Inducible Systems

Beyond constitutive expression, new systems address the need for inducible and context-independent expression.

• iFFL-Stabilized Promoters: Using transcription-activator like effectors (TALEs) and an incoherent feedforward loop (iFFL), engineers have created promoters in E. coli that maintain constant expression levels at different plasmid copy numbers or genomic locations. This robustness ensures consistent pathway performance despite genetic or environmental fluctuations [4].
• Orthogonal Transcription Factors: A toolkit of 12 engineered bacteriophage λ cI variants operates as activators, repressors, or dual-function switches on up to 270 synthetic promoters. These parts enable complex logic gates and multi-input control within synthetic circuits, expanding the repertoire for sophisticated regulatory schemes in bacteria [42].

Figure 1: Workflow for mining and characterizing metagenomic promoter libraries, resulting in regulatory elements with defined host ranges.

Quantitative Data and Performance Comparison

The following tables summarize key performance metrics for the different types of promoter libraries discussed, providing a reference for selection in refactoring projects.

Table 1: Performance Metrics of Orthogonal and Metagenomic Promoter Libraries

Library Type	Design Strategy	Key Features	Characterized Hosts	Expression Range
Orthogonal SPL [4]	Randomization of promoter & RBS regions	High orthogonality; avoids recombination	Streptomyces albus	Strong, medium, weak tiers
Metagenomic RS Library [41]	Mining of 5' UTRs from 184 genomes	16.9% universally active; host-specificity	B. subtilis, E. coli, P. aeruginosa	Several orders of magnitude
σ-Factor Specific ProD [43]	Spacer randomization & machine learning	Predictable TIF; orthogonal to σ factors	E. coli (σ70), B. subtilis (σB, σF, σW)	Five log range

Table 2: Predictive Features for Metagenomic Regulatory Sequence Activity in E. coli [41]

Feature	Correlation with Transcription Activity	Contribution to Model
σ70 Binding Motif Match	Positively correlated	Most informative single parameter
Promoter GC Content	Anti-correlated	Moderate contribution
5' mRNA Stability (ΔG)	Positively correlated with lower stability (higher ΔG)	Moderate contribution
Combined Linear Model	N/A	Explains 69% of variance in E. coli

Experimental Protocols

Protocol: Multiplexed Promoter Replacement via CRISPR-TAR

This protocol is adapted from mCRISTAR/miCRISTAR methods for the simultaneous replacement of multiple native promoters in a target BGC with synthetic counterparts [4].

Principle: Utilizes yeast homologous recombination (YHR) and CRISPR/Cas9 to efficiently swap promoters in vivo or in vitro.

Materials:

• pCRISTAR Vector: A yeast shuttle vector containing a counter-selectable marker and a CRISPR/Cas9 expression cassette [4].
• Synthetic Promoter Cassettes: PCR-amplified DNA fragments of your chosen orthogonal promoters, each flanked by ~40 bp homology arms matching the regions upstream and downstream of the native BGC promoter to be replaced.
• BGC DNA: The entire BGC cloned in a yeast shuttle vector (e.g., BAC).
• Yeast Strain: Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain with high recombination efficiency (e.g., VL6-48N).
• Chemicals: Standard yeast media (YPD, SC dropout media), polyethylene glycol (PEG), lithium acetate, single-stranded carrier DNA.

Procedure:

• Co-transform: Introduce the pCRISTAR vector, the BGC-containing BAC, and the pool of synthetic promoter cassettes into competent yeast cells using the LiAc/SS carrier DNA/PEG method.
• Select & Counter-Select: Plate transformations on appropriate synthetic dropout media to select for the pCRISTAR and BAC vectors. Subsequently, counter-select on media containing 5-fluoroorotic acid (5-FOA) to eliminate yeast cells that still harbor the pCRISTAR vector, thereby enriching for clones that have successfully undergone recombination and lost the CRISPR plasmid.
• Screen & Validate: Isolate yeast plasmid DNA from surviving colonies. Transform the isolated DNA into E. coli for amplification. Verify the structure of the refactored BGC by analytical PCR (to check for promoter insertion) and full-length sequencing (to confirm the absence of unintended mutations).

Protocol: Characterizing Regulatory Sequences via FACS-Seq

This protocol describes a high-throughput method for quantifying the activity of a library of regulatory sequences (e.g., a metagenomic RS library) in a selected host [41] [43].

Principle: A library of regulatory sequences is cloned upstream of a fluorescent reporter gene (e.g., sfGFP). The host cell population is sorted by Fluorescence-Activated Cell Sorting (FACS) into bins based on fluorescence intensity. High-throughput DNA sequencing of each bin then links sequence to activity.

Materials:

• RS Library: A pooled, barcoded library of regulatory sequences.
• Reporter Plasmid: A shuttle vector containing a promoterless sfGFP or mCherry gene.
• Host Strains: The target heterologous expression strains (e.g., Streptomyces, E. coli, B. subtilis).
• Equipment: Flow cytometer/FACS sorter, high-throughput DNA sequencer.

Procedure:

• Library Cloning: Clone the pooled RS library into the reporter plasmid upstream of the promoterless sfGFP gene.
• Transformation & Culture: Transform the library into the desired host strain at high coverage. Grow multiple cultures to mid-exponential phase under standard conditions.
• FACS Sorting: Harvest cells and use FACS to sort the population into 6-12 discrete bins based on their sfGFP fluorescence intensity. Include a "non-fluorescent" bin and several bins for increasingly high fluorescence.
• DNA Sequencing & Analysis: Isolate plasmid DNA from each sorted bin. Amplify the regulatory sequence region with bin-specific indexes and subject to high-throughput sequencing. The relative abundance of each unique RS sequence in each fluorescence bin directly reflects its transcriptional strength in the host.

Figure 2: FACS-Seq workflow for high-throughput characterization of promoter library activity.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for Promoter Library Engineering

Reagent / Tool	Function	Example Use-Case
Orthogonal SPL for Actinomycetes [4]	Multiplex promoter engineering in high-GC bacteria.	Refactoring silent polyketide and non-ribosomal peptide BGCs in Streptomyces.
Metagenomic RS Library [41]	Provides regulatory parts with pre-defined host ranges.	Activating a BGC from an exotic source in a standard lab host without cross-species compatibility issues.
ProD (Promoter Designer) Tool [43]	Online tool for de novo design of σ-factor specific promoters with predicted TIF.	Fine-tuning the expression of each gene in a heterologous metabolic pathway to balance flux.
Orthogonal cI TF/Promoter System [42]	Enables complex logic (activation, repression) in synthetic circuits.	Constructing a multi-input genetic circuit that only activates a BGC under specific metabolite concentrations.
Flexible DNA Assembly Toolkit [44]	Facilitates modular assembly of genetic parts and refactoring of large BGCs.	Assembling a fully refactored BGC from standardized promoter, gene, and terminator parts.

Application Notes in Natural Product Research

The integration of these novel promoter libraries is transforming natural product discovery pipelines.

• Activation of Silent BGCs: The primary application is the systematic activation of transcriptionally silent clusters. For instance, the miCRISTAR technique was used to rapidly activate a silent BGC, leading to the discovery of the antitumor sesterterpenes, atolypenes A and B [4].
• Yield Optimization: Beyond activation, promoter libraries are critical for tuning the expression of individual genes in a known BGC to remove rate-limiting steps and optimize metabolic flux for overproduction [40] [44].
• Orthogonal Expression Systems: For BGCs with products toxic to cloning hosts (e.g., E. coli), orthogonal systems with host-specific regulators are vital. An SARP-based system from Actinoalloteichus fjordicus successfully enabled the heterologous production of lasso peptides in Streptomyces without toxicity during cloning [45].

The development of novel promoter libraries—characterized by orthogonality, inducible control, and metagenomic diversity—provides a powerful and expanding toolkit for the refactoring of natural product BGCs. These resources directly address the central challenge of silent genetic potential in microbial genomes. By leveraging the quantitative data, standardized protocols, and reagent solutions detailed in this application note, researchers can more effectively activate cryptic metabolic pathways and optimize the production of valuable natural products, thereby accelerating the pace of drug discovery and development.

AI-Powered Promoter Design with DeepSEED and Language Models

A significant challenge in natural product research is the low production titers of valuable compounds in laboratory settings. Many biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) in actinomycetes and other organisms remain transcriptionally silent under standard culture conditions, making it difficult to characterize their metabolic products [46]. Refactoring these natural BGCs with synthetic promoters offers a powerful solution to activate and optimize the expression of biosynthetic pathways. Traditional promoter engineering approaches have relied on natural promoter elements with limited versatility, but artificial intelligence (AI) now enables the precise design of synthetic regulatory elements tailored to specific experimental needs. This application note details how AI-powered tools, particularly DeepSEED and genomic language models, are revolutionizing promoter design for refactoring natural product gene clusters.

AI Framework for Promoter Design: DeepSEED

Conceptual Foundation and Architecture

DeepSEED (Deep learning-based flanking Sequence Engineering for Efficient promoter Design) represents a paradigm shift in synthetic promoter design by integrating expert biological knowledge with data-driven deep learning models. The framework addresses a critical limitation in traditional promoter design: the arbitrary decision-making surrounding flanking sequences around transcription factor binding sites (TFBSs), which significantly influence promoter properties but have been largely overlooked [47].

The promoter design problem is formulated probabilistically as maximizing the joint probability of the promoter sequence (s) and target property (T). The sequence is divided into 'seed' sequences (m) derived from expert knowledge and flanking regions (f). DeepSEED implements a two-stage optimization process [47]:

• Expert Knowledge Integration: Maximizes P(m|T) by selecting seed sequences compatible with target properties based on established biological knowledge
• Sequence Optimization: Maximizes P(f|m,T) by generating optimal flanking sequences conditioned on the seed and target properties

The technical architecture employs two deep learning models: a conditional Generative Adversarial Network (cGAN) for generating flanking sequences based on preset sequence elements, and a DenseNet-LSTM-based predictor model for evaluating promoter properties. This combination enables the generation of novel promoter sequences with desired characteristics while maintaining biological functionality [47].

Workflow and Implementation

Diagram 1: DeepSEED Promoter Design Workflow - This flowchart illustrates the step-by-step process for designing synthetic promoters using the DeepSEED framework, from initial property definition to experimental validation.

Genomic Language Models for Sequence Design

Transformer Architectures in Genomics

The convergence of natural language processing (NLP) and genomics has produced Genome Large Language Models (Gene-LLMs) that interpret DNA sequences with unprecedented resolution. These transformer-based models process raw nucleotide sequences using self-supervised pretraining to decipher complex regulatory grammars hidden within the genome [48].

Gene-LLMs employ specialized tokenization strategies, primarily k-mer tokenization, which segments long DNA sequences into overlapping fragments of length K (e.g., "ATGCGA"). This approach mirrors subword tokenization in NLP and allows models to capture contextual relationships between nucleotides, essential for understanding regulatory syntax [48]. Models like DNABERT have demonstrated effectiveness in promoter prediction and splice-site identification through k-mer-based adaptation of BERT architecture [48].

Integration with Promoter Design Pipelines

Diagram 2: Genomic Language Model Pipeline - This diagram outlines the sequential processing of genomic data through tokenization, pretraining, and task-specific fine-tuning for regulatory element prediction and sequence generation.

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

DeepSEED Implementation for Bacterial Promoters

Protocol: Designing Constitutive Promoters for Actinomycetes

This protocol adapts the DeepSEED framework for designing constitutive promoters to activate silent biosynthetic gene clusters in actinomycetes.

• Step 1: Seed Sequence Selection

  • Identify and curate known TFBSs essential for constitutive expression in actinomycetes (e.g., -10 and -35 elements for sigma factor recognition)
  • Input these as fixed 'seed' sequences into the DeepSEED framework
  • Parameters: Maintain seed sequences as constant elements while allowing flanking regions to be optimized

• Step 2: Model Configuration and Training

  • Utilize the cGAN generator with attention-based layers to capture long-range interactions in regulatory codes
  • Employ the DenseNet-LSTM predictor model pre-trained on functional E. coli promoters, fine-tuned with actinomycete promoter data if available
  • Parameters: Train for 100,000 iterations with batch size 64, learning rate 0.0001 for generator and 0.0004 for discriminator

• Step 3: Sequence Generation and Optimization

  • Run genetic algorithm (GA) combining the cGAN generator and predictor to maximize promoter activity
  • Generate 10,000 candidate sequences and select top 50 based on predicted activity scores
  • Parameters: GA population size of 1,000, crossover rate 0.8, mutation rate 0.02, run for 100 generations

• Step 4: In Silico Validation

  • Analyze k-mer frequencies (k=4-6) to ensure generated sequences maintain natural genomic patterns
  • Predict DNA shape features (MGW, Roll, ProT, HelT) to confirm structural compatibility
  • Calculate sequence similarity to natural genomic sequences to avoid homology issues

• Step 5: Experimental Validation

  • Synthesize top 10-20 promoter sequences and clone upstream of reporter genes in actinomycete vectors
  • Transform into host strain (e.g., Streptomyces coelicolor) and measure expression under standard culture conditions
  • Compare activity to native promoters using qRT-PCR and product yield measurements

Language Model-Guided Promoter Optimization

Protocol: Enhancing Promoter Performance with DNABERT

This protocol utilizes pre-trained DNA language models for optimizing existing promoter sequences in natural product BGCs.

• Step 1: Model Selection and Setup

  • Obtain DNABERT model pretrained on genomic sequences
  • Fine-tune on curated dataset of high-expression actinomycete promoters if available
  • Parameters: Use learning rate of 5e-5, train for 10 epochs with batch size 32

• Step 2: Sequence Analysis and Mutation Planning

  • Input natural promoter sequences from target BGCs into DNABERT
  • Generate saliency maps to identify nucleotides with highest impact on predicted expression
  • Plan targeted mutations at high-impact positions while preserving critical TFBSs

• Step 3: In Silico Mutagenesis and Screening

  • Generate multiple sequence variants with systematic mutations at identified positions
  • Use model to predict expression levels for all variants
  • Select top candidates with highest predicted expression for synthesis

• Step 4: Experimental Characterization

  • Clone selected variants into reporter constructs and measure expression
  • Validate optimal performers in context of full BGC refactoring
  • Measure natural product yields to confirm improved pathway performance

Quantitative Performance Data

Table 1: Performance Metrics of AI-Designed Promoters in Various Systems

Organism/System	Promoter Type	Success Rate	Expression Range	Key Improvements	Validation Method
E. coli [47]	Constitutive	High	2-500 fold	Flanking sequence optimization	Reporter assays, RNA-seq
E. coli [47]	IPTG-inducible	High	3-150 fold	Reduced basal expression	Flow cytometry, enzymatic assays
Mammalian Cells [47]	Dox-inducible	High	5-200 fold	Improved dynamic range	Luciferase assays, FACS
S. cerevisiae [49]	Constitutive	Moderate-High	3-fold increase	Mutation-resistant design	LTB protein expression
Actinomycetes [46]	Constitutive/Inducible	Moderate	Varies	Activation of silent BGCs	Metabolite production

Table 2: Comparison of AI Models for Promoter Design

Model/Platform	Architecture	Key Features	Applications	Limitations
DeepSEED [47]	cGAN + DenseNet-LSTM	Flanking sequence optimization, Expert knowledge integration	Prokaryotic & eukaryotic promoters, Constitutive & inducible	Requires predefined seed sequences
DNABERT [48]	Transformer (BERT)	K-mer tokenization, Self-supervised pretraining	Promoter prediction, Splice-site identification	Primarily predictive, less generative
Pymaker [49]	DNABERT-based	Pre-trained model fine-tuning, Mutation simulation	Yeast promoter optimization	Limited to studied organisms
Nucleotide Transformer [48]	Multi-species Transformer	Cross-species generalization, Long-range attention	Variant effect prediction, Sequence alignment	Computational resource intensive

Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for AI-Guided Promoter Engineering

Reagent/Tool	Function	Application in Promoter Engineering
DeepSEED Framework [47]	AI-powered flanking sequence design	Optimizes sequences around TFBSs for enhanced promoter properties
DNABERT [49] [48]	Genomic sequence analysis	Predicts promoter expression levels and identifies regulatory elements
Pymaker [49]	Yeast promoter prediction	Specialized model for predicting and optimizing yeast promoter expression
Genetic Algorithm Optimizer [47]	Sequence property optimization	Combines generative and predictive models to maximize desired promoter characteristics
Saliency Map Analysis [47]	Feature importance visualization	Identifies nucleotides with highest impact on promoter activity for targeted engineering
DNA Shape Prediction Tools [47]	Structural feature analysis	Predicts MGW, Roll, ProT, and HelT parameters to assess structural compatibility
t-SNE Embedding [47]	High-dimensional data visualization	Clusters promoters based on DNA shape features and correlates with activity

Application in Natural Product Cluster Refactoring

Implementation Strategy

Diagram 3: BGC Refactoring with AI-Designed Promoters - This workflow outlines the comprehensive process of refactoring natural product gene clusters using AI-designed synthetic promoters, from identification of target clusters to production optimization.

Case Study: Activation of Silent Gene Clusters

The application of AI-designed promoters has proven particularly valuable for activating silent biosynthetic gene clusters in actinomycetes. By replacing native promoters with optimized synthetic variants, researchers have successfully awakened silent pathways to discover novel natural products. Promoter engineering approaches have enabled transcriptional activation or optimization of biosynthetic genes that remain dormant under standard laboratory conditions [46].

The AI-driven approach offers significant advantages over traditional methods by simultaneously considering multiple sequence features that influence promoter activity, including k-mer frequencies, DNA structural parameters, and epigenetic markers when available. This comprehensive optimization leads to synthetic promoters that not only exhibit enhanced activity but also maintain functionality across different growth phases and conditions, addressing a critical challenge in natural product discovery and development.

AI-powered promoter design using DeepSEED and genomic language models represents a transformative approach for refactoring natural product gene clusters. By integrating expert knowledge with data-driven pattern recognition, these tools enable the creation of synthetic promoters with tailored properties that overcome the limitations of natural regulatory elements. The protocols and methodologies outlined in this application note provide researchers with practical frameworks for implementing these advanced techniques in their natural product discovery and optimization pipelines. As AI models continue to evolve and incorporate more diverse genomic data, their predictive accuracy and design capabilities will further accelerate the development of high-yielding microbial strains for natural product production.

Navigating Technical Challenges and Enhancing Efficiency

Addressing Cytotoxicity and Off-Target Effects of CRISPR-Cas9

The refactoring of natural product gene clusters by replacing native regulatory elements with synthetic promoters is a powerful strategy in metabolic engineering to enhance the production of valuable specialized metabolites [50]. The CRISPR-Cas9 system has emerged as the preferred tool for such precise genomic manipulations. However, researchers working with industrially relevant organisms such as Streptomyces—which possess high GC-content genomes and large, repetitive biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs)—face significant challenges due to CRISPR-Cas9 cytotoxicity and off-target effects [50] [10].

These issues are particularly pronounced in this context. The high GC content of Streptomyces genomes increases the frequency of Cas9 recognition sites (5'-NGG-3' PAM sites), elevating the potential for off-target binding [10]. Furthermore, large, repetitive modular polyketide synthase (PKS) genes contain numerous homologous sequences, making them susceptible to erroneous cleavage by the Cas9 nuclease [50]. This unintended activity can trigger cellular stress responses, cause large-scale genomic rearrangements, and ultimately result in cell death, severely hampering editing efficiency and strain engineering efforts [50] [10]. This Application Note outlines validated strategies and detailed protocols to mitigate these challenges, enabling efficient and precise genome editing within natural product refactoring workflows.

Strategic Approaches and Underlying Mechanisms

Engineered Cas9 Variants with Enhanced Fidelity

The strategic engineering of the Cas9 protein itself has yielded variants with dramatically improved fidelity.

• Cas9-BD: A recently developed variant, Cas9-BD, addresses the charge-charge interaction between Cas9's basic residues and the phosphate backbone of DNA by adding a polyaspartate (DDDDD) tag to both the N- and C-termini via a flexible glycine-serine linker [10]. This modification selectively impedes binding to off-target sites (which have weaker interactions) while preserving strong on-target cleavage. In Streptomyces coelicolor, the use of Cas9-BD resulted in a 77-fold increase in exconjugants and achieved an editing efficiency of 98.1% for target gene deletion, while significantly reducing off-target mutations compared to wild-type Cas9 [10].
• High-Fidelity Variants: Other engineered Cas9 variants, such as eSpCas9 and SpCas9-HF1, were designed to reduce non-specific interactions with the non-target DNA strand. These "high-fidelity" mutants incorporate point mutations that create a proofreading mechanism, trapping the Cas9-sgRNA complex in an inactive state when bound to mismatched targets [51]. It has been reported that SpCas9-HF1 retains on-target activity comparable to wild-type SpCas9 for over 85% of sgRNAs tested in human cells [51].

Regulatory Systems to Control Cas9 Expression

Tightly regulating the expression and timing of Cas9 nuclease activity is a highly effective method for mitigating its cytotoxicity.

• Riboswitch-Mediated Control: Inducible riboswitches, such as the theophylline-responsive riboswitch E, can be placed upstream of the *cas9 gene to control its translation [50]. In the absence of theophylline, the riboswitch adopts a conformation that inhibits translation. Upon addition of the ligand, a conformational change occurs, allowing translation to proceed. This system minimizes basal Cas9 expression during vector propagation and conjugation, reducing chronic cellular stress and improving transformation efficiency. The simple and reversible nature of this control makes it particularly valuable for working with sensitive microbial hosts [50].
• Tuned Constitutive Promoters: Using a strong, constitutive promoter (e.g., ermE) to drive *cas9 expression often leads to high cytotoxicity. Replacing it with a weaker, tunable promoter that provides sufficient expression for efficient on-target editing while minimizing the duration and level of nuclease exposure can significantly improve cell viability and editing outcomes [50] [10].

sgRNA Design and Delivery Optimization

The design of the single-guide RNA (sgRNA) is a critical determinant of specificity.

• Truncated sgRNAs (tru-gRNAs): Shortening the 5' end of the sgRNA complementarity region by 2-3 nucleotides can increase its binding stringency. This reduces off-target effects caused by mismatches in the distal region, often without compromising on-target efficiency [52].
• GC Content and Specificity: Designing sgRNAs with a GC content between 40% and 60% in the seed sequence (the ~12 nucleotides proximal to the PAM) stabilizes the DNA:RNA duplex and improves on-target activity. Guides with extreme GC content are more prone to off-target binding [51].
• Chemical Modifications: Incorporating specific chemical modifications, such as 2'-O-methyl-3'-phosphonoacetate, into the sgRNA backbone can enhance its stability and increase specificity by reducing off-target cleavage activities [51].

Table 1: Summary of Strategies to Mitigate CRISPR-Cas9 Cytotoxicity and Off-Target Effects

Strategy Category	Specific Method	Key Feature	Reported Outcome
Engineered Cas9 Variants	Cas9-BD [10]	Polyaspartate tags at N- and C-termini	77-fold more exconjugants; >98% editing efficiency; reduced off-targets
	SpCas9-HF1 [51]	Reduced non-target strand binding	>85% of sgRNAs maintained on-target activity
Expression Control	Theophylline Riboswitch [50]	Ligand-induced translation	Reduced basal cytotoxicity, improved transformation
	Promoter Tuning [50] [10]	Weaker, constitutive expression	Balanced nuclease activity and cell viability
sgRNA Optimization	Truncated sgRNAs (tru-gRNAs) [52]	2-3 nt shorter at 5' end	Increased binding stringency, reduced off-target effects
	GC Content Optimization [51]	40-60% GC in seed region	Improved on-target efficiency and specificity
Alternative Systems	Cas12a (Cpf1) [53]	T-rich PAM (TTTV), sticky ends	Lower off-target rate in some genomic contexts

Experimental Protocols

Protocol: Implementation of Cas9-BD for BGC Refactoring inStreptomyces

This protocol details the use of the high-fidelity Cas9-BD nuclease for replacing a native promoter with a synthetic one within a biosynthetic gene cluster in Streptomyces.

I. Materials

• Plasmid Vector: pCRISPomyces-2BD (or similar Streptomyces-CRISPR vector with Cas9-BD) [10].
• Bacterial Strains: E. coli ET12567/pUZ8002 (for conjugation), and the Streptomyces host strain.
• Oligonucleotides: Designed for sgRNA targeting and donor template construction.
• Media: LB for E. coli; Soy Mannitol (SM) or R5 agar for Streptomyces; AS-1 medium for conjugation [50].

II. Procedure

• sgRNA Design and Cloning:
  • Design an sgRNA sequence to target the genomic region immediately upstream or within the native promoter sequence to be replaced.
  • Synthesize and clone the sgRNA oligonucleotide duplex into the BsmBI site of the pCRISPomyces-2BD vector.

• Donor Template Construction:

  • Design a donor DNA template containing your synthetic promoter flanked by homology arms (800-1200 bp each) that are homologous to the sequences upstream and downstream of the Cas9 cut site.
  • This donor can be cloned into the pCRISPomyces-2BD vector or delivered on a separate, compatible plasmid.

• Conjugation into Streptomyces:

  • Transform the constructed plasmid into the methylation-deficient E. coli ET12567/pUZ8002 strain.
  • Grow the E. coli donor and the Streptomyces recipient strain to an OD~600~ of ~0.6.
  • Mix the cultures, pellet, and resuspend. Plate the mixture on AS-1 agar plates and incubate at 30°C for ~16 hours.
  • Overlay the plates with apramycin (for selection) and nalidixic acid (to counter-select E. coli). Incubate at 30°C until exconjugants appear (typically 3-7 days) [50].

• Screening and Validation:

  • Pick exconjugant colonies and culture them.
  • Isolate genomic DNA and perform PCR amplification across the edited locus.
  • Verify the successful promoter swap by Sanger sequencing of the PCR product.

Protocol: Detecting Off-Target Effects Using CIRCLE-seq

For a comprehensive pre-clinical safety assessment, identifying potential off-target sites is crucial. CIRCLE-seq is a highly sensitive, cell-free method for genome-wide profiling of Cas9 off-target sites [54].

I. Materials

• Genomic DNA (gDNA): Purified from the target Streptomyces strain.
• CRISPR Components: Purified Cas9 protein and in vitro transcribed sgRNA.
• Enzymes: Plasmid-Safe ATP-dependent DNase, T4 DNA Ligase, Fragmentase (NEB).
• Kits: NEBNext Ultra II DNA Library Prep Kit, AMPure XP beads.

II. Procedure

• Genomic DNA Shearing and Circularization:
  • Fragment ~1 µg of gDNA to an average size of 500 bp using a Fragmentase.
  • Repair the ends of the sheared DNA and ligate them using T4 DNA Ligase to form circular DNA molecules.

• Cas9 Digestion and Linear DNA Enrichment:

  • Incubate the circularized DNA with pre-assembled Cas9-sgRNA ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complexes to cleave at both on-target and off-target sites. Cleaved sites linearize the circular DNA.
  • Treat the reaction with Plasmid-Safe DNase, which degrades all remaining circular and linear DNA except for the newly linearized fragments protected by the bound Cas9.

• Library Preparation and Sequencing:

  • Purify the Cas9-protected linear fragments.
  • Prepare a sequencing library using the NEBNext Ultra II kit and sequence on an Illumina platform.

• Bioinformatic Analysis:

  • Map the sequenced reads to the reference genome.
  • Identify sites with a significant pileup of read starts, which correspond to Cas9 cleavage sites.
  • Compare these sites to the on-target sequence to compile a list of potential off-target loci for downstream validation (e.g., by amplicon sequencing) [54].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents

Table 2: Key Research Reagent Solutions for High-Fidelity CRISPR Editing

Reagent / Tool	Function / Description	Example Use Case
pCRISPomyces-2BD [10]	CRISPR plasmid expressing the Cas9-BD variant.	General genome editing in Streptomyces with reduced cytotoxicity.
Theophylline-Inducible Riboswitch E* [50]	RNA element placed upstream of cas9 for ligand-controlled translation.	Tightly regulated Cas9 expression to improve conjugation efficiency.
Cas-OFFinder [54]	In silico tool for genome-wide prediction of potential off-target sites.	Preliminary sgRNA screening and risk assessment during design phase.
CIRCLE-seq [54]	High-sensitivity, cell-free method for experimental identification of off-target sites.	Comprehensive off-target profiling for pre-clinical therapeutic development.
High-Fidelity Cas9 Variants (e.g., SpCas9-HF1) [51]	Engineered Cas9 proteins with point mutations for enhanced specificity.	Critical gene knock-ins or editing in loci with highly similar paralogs.
pYH7 Plasmid [50]	Source of the pIJ101 replicon for segregationally unstable plasmids.	Prevents accumulation of CRISPR plasmids, reducing genetic instability.

Managing Large BGCs and Repetitive Sequences (NRPS/PKS)

The refactoring of natural product gene clusters with synthetic promoters represents a cornerstone strategy in modern synthetic biology, aiming to unlock the vast potential of microbial genomes for drug discovery. This endeavor is particularly critical for two of the most prolific families of natural products: nonribosomal peptides (NRPs) and polyketides (PKs). These compounds are synthesized by massive enzymatic assembly lines—nonribosomal peptide synthetases (NRPSs) and polyketide synthases (PKSs)—encoded within large biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs). A systematic genome-mining study discovered 3,339 such gene clusters across 2,699 genomes, a third of which were hybrid NRPS/PKS systems, highlighting their structural complexity and prevalence [55]. However, their size, repetitive genetic architecture, and complex regulation present formidable challenges for heterologous expression and engineering. This application note details advanced protocols designed to overcome these hurdles, providing a structured framework for the refactoring and stable expression of large, repetitive NRPS/PKS clusters within the broader context of synthetic promoter research.

Technical Challenges and Strategic Solutions

Working with large NRPS/PKS BGCs presents a unique set of technical obstacles that require specialized solutions. The table below summarizes the primary challenges and corresponding strategic approaches.

Table 1: Key Challenges and Strategic Solutions for Large BGC Engineering

Challenge	Impact on Engineering	Strategic Solution
Large Cluster Size (>50-100 kb)	Difficult to clone and manipulate in E. coli; low transformation efficiency.	Direct cloning methods (e.g., TAR, ExoCET); heterologous expression in optimized hosts like Streptomyces [4] [56].
Repetitive Sequences (Homologous domains/modules)	Instability in recombination-proficient E. coli; unwanted homologous recombination.	Use of specialized E. coli strains with enhanced genetic stability; careful boundary selection to break repetition [57] [56].
Cryptic Native Regulation	BGCs are "silent" under standard laboratory conditions.	Full refactoring by replacing native promoters with synthetic, constitutive ones [4] [15].
Inefficient Intermodular Communication	Chimeric PKSs exhibit dramatically reduced product titers.	Adoption of non-canonical module boundaries (e.g., the Exchange Unit model ending with KS) [57].

Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Refactoring BGCs Using Orthogonal Synthetic Promoters

This protocol is designed to activate silent BGCs by replacing their native regulatory elements with a library of orthogonal synthetic promoters, thereby decoupling expression from native, often unknown, regulatory cues.

Key Materials:

• BGC Source: Genomic DNA from the native producer strain.
• Cloning Host: E. coli strains with enhanced recombination systems (e.g., GB2005/DH5G with rhamnose-inducible Redαβγ) [56].
• Refactoring Tools: Plasmids for multiplexed CRISPR-TAR (e.g., miCRISTAR/mpCRISTAR) [4].
• Synthetic Promoter Library: A set of fully randomized regulatory cassettes (promoter + RBS) with varying strengths, orthogonal to the host's transcriptional network [4] [15].

Methodology:

• BGC Capture: Isolate the target BGC from genomic DNA using Transformation-Associated Recombination (TAR) cloning in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
• In-Silico Design: Identify all native promoter regions upstream of each biosynthetic gene in the BGC. Design oligonucleotides for their replacement with synthetic cassettes.
• Multiplexed Promoter Replacement:
  • Utilize the miCRISTAR platform, which combines in vitro CRISPR-Cas9 digestion with yeast homologous recombination.
  • Simultaneously target all native promoters within the BGC. Provide linear DNA fragments of the synthetic promoter cassettes with flanking homology arms (≥40 bp) to the BGC regions adjacent to the Cas9 cut sites.
  • Co-transform the Cas9-linearized BGC vector and the promoter cassette pool into yeast. Homology-directed repair in yeast will reassemble the refactored BGC [4].
• Validation: Isolve plasmid DNA from yeast and transform into a methylation-deficient E. coli strain for propagation. Verify the complete refactoring by whole-plasmid sequencing.

Protocol 2: Enhancing Hybrid PKS Functionality Through Alternative Module Boundaries

This protocol addresses the critical issue of inefficient chain transfer between modules in engineered PKSs by redefining the standard module boundaries.

Key Materials:

• Chassis Strain: Streptomyces coelicolor A3(2)-2023, a genetically minimized strain with multiple recombinase-mediated cassette exchange (RMCE) sites [56].
• Engineering Platform: Micro-HEP (Microbial Heterologous Expression Platform) or similar system utilizing E. coli with Redαβγ recombineering and conjugation capabilities [56].
• RMCE Cassettes: Modular integration cassettes containing orthogonal recombination systems (e.g., Cre-lox, Vika-vox, Dre-rox) [56].

Methodology:

• Boundary Selection: Based on evolutionary and structural analysis, design module swaps using the PKS Exchange Unit (XU) model. This model defines a module as starting at the acyltransferase (AT) domain and ending after the ketosynthase (KS) domain of the next module, contrary to the traditional genetic organization [57].
• Vector Construction:
  • In the Micro-HEP E. coli platform, use rhamnose-induced Redαβγ recombineering to precisely swap KS domains or entire XUs between modules from different PKSs.
  • Assemble the engineered hybrid PKS gene cluster in a vector containing an RMCE cassette (e.g., Vika-vox) and the conjugation origin oriT [56].
• Conjugation and Integration:
  • Mobilize the final construct from E. coli into the S. coelicolor chassis via intergeneric conjugation.
  • Leverage the orthogonal RMCE system to integrate the PKS BGC into a pre-defined chromosomal locus without the plasmid backbone, enhancing genetic stability.
• Fermentation and Analysis: Cultivate exconjugants in appropriate media and analyze metabolite production using LC-HRMS. Compare titers of the hybrid PKS constructed with XU boundaries against those using traditional boundaries [57].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Successful implementation of the above protocols relies on a suite of specialized reagents and host systems.

Table 2: Key Research Reagent Solutions for BGC Refactoring

Reagent / Tool	Function/Description	Application in Protocols
Micro-HEP Platform	A bifunctional E. coli system combining Redαβγ recombineering and conjugation transfer capabilities [56].	Core host for DNA modification and transfer in Protocol 2.
S. coelicolor A3(2)-2023	A engineered Streptomyces chassis with deleted endogenous BGCs and multiple orthogonal RMCE sites [56].	Optimized heterologous host for expression in Protocol 2.
Orthogonal RMCE Systems (Cre-lox, Vika-vox)	Tyrosine recombinases and their unique target sites enabling stable, marker-less genomic integration [56].	Backbone-free integration of large BGCs in Protocol 2.
Randomized Synthetic Cassettes	Fully randomized 5' regulatory sequences (promoter + RBS) providing a wide range of orthogonal, tunable expression strengths [4].	Refactoring silent BGCs in Protocol 1.
TAR Cloning	Transformation-Associated Recombination in yeast for capturing large DNA fragments directly from genomic DNA [56].	Initial BGC cloning in Protocol 1.
miCRISTAR	A multiplexed CRISPR-based TAR method for simultaneous replacement of multiple promoters in a single step [4].	High-efficiency refactoring in Protocol 1.

Workflow and Data Visualization

The following diagram illustrates the integrated workflow for refactoring and expressing a large BGC, synthesizing the protocols described above.

Diagram 1: Integrated BGC Refactoring and Expression Workflow.

The strategic implementation of these protocols, leveraging the specified toolkit, enables researchers to systematically overcome the barriers to accessing the valuable chemical diversity encoded by large and repetitive NRPS/PKS BGCs. This structured approach, framed within a synthetic promoter research context, facilitates the discovery of novel natural products and the optimization of their production.

Strategies for Fine-Tuning Expression Levels and Metabolic Burden

Refactoring natural product gene clusters with synthetic promoters is a core strategy in modern metabolic engineering. However, the heterologous expression of complex pathways often imposes a significant metabolic burden on the host chassis, leading to suboptimal performance and reduced product titers. This burden manifests as competition for cellular resources—including nucleotides, amino acids, energy, and ribosomes—between native processes and the introduced synthetic constructs [58] [59]. Consequently, fine-tuning expression levels is not merely an optimization step but a fundamental requirement for achieving efficient and sustainable production. This Application Note provides detailed protocols and frameworks for quantifying, balancing, and controlling gene expression to minimize metabolic load while maximizing the output of target natural products. The strategies outlined herein are designed specifically for researchers engaged in the refactoring of complex biosynthetic pathways.

Quantitative Analysis of Expression Control Strategies

Selecting the appropriate genetic parts and control strategies is crucial for managing metabolic load. The table below summarizes key parameters for different fine-tuning approaches.

Table 1: Strategies for Fine-Tuning Expression and Reducing Metabolic Burden

Strategy Category	Specific Method/Part	Key Performance/Parameter	Effect on Metabolic Burden	Considerations
Promoter Engineering	Constitutive (e.g., TDH3P in yeast)	High, stable expression; outperformed ENO1P in xylanase production [60]	Can be high if unregulated; requires careful selection.	Performance is condition-specific; test under intended cultivation parameters [60].
	Inducible (e.g., Ptet, PrhaBAD for T7 RNAP)	Reduces leaky expression; suitable for toxic proteins [58]	Decouples growth from production, significantly reducing burden during growth phase.	Requires inducer addition; potential cost at scale.
Transcriptional Tuning	RBS Library for T7 RNAP	Expression levels tunable from 28% to 220% of wild-type [58]	Enables customized expression intensity to match host capacity.	High-throughput screening required for optimal variant identification.
	Synthetic Transcription Factors (T-Pro)	Enables complex logic with ~4x smaller circuits vs. canonical designs [61]	Circuit compression directly reduces part count and resource competition.	Requires engineering orthogonal regulator/promoter pairs.
Translational & Post-Translational Control	Molecular Chaperone Overexpression	Improves solubility and activity of recombinant proteins [58]	Reduces burden from misfolded proteins and inclusion bodies.	Co-expression of chaperones itself imposes a load.
Host Engineering	Metabolic Load Biomarkers (e.g., from RNA-seq)	Machine learning identified gene pairs for discriminative load sensing [59]	Enables dynamic monitoring and feedback control of burden.	Biomarker validation is required for specific host-strain backgrounds.

Experimental Protocols

Protocol: Fine-Tuning Expression via Ribosome Binding Site (RBS) Library Construction and Screening

This protocol describes the creation of a library of T7 RNAP expression variants to identify optimal expression levels that minimize host burden for a specific pathway of interest [58].

Materials and Equipment

• E. coli BL21(DE3) or similar expression host.
• CRISPR/Cas9 system or cytosine base editor for genomic integration.
• RBS calculator (e.g., online RBS Library Calculator).
• Flow cytometer or microplate reader for high-throughput screening.
• primers for RBS diversity.

Procedure

• Design RBS Library: Using an RBS calculator, design a set of 10-20 RBS sequences with predicted strengths spanning a wide range of translational efficiencies for the gene encoding T7 RNAP.
• Genomic Integration: Employ a CRISPR/Cas9-based method to integrate the designed RBS variants upstream of the genomic T7 RNAP gene in your expression host. This generates a library of host strains with varying T7 RNAP expression levels.
• Transformation and Selection: Introduce the refactored gene cluster (on a plasmid or integrated into the genome) into the library of RBS-variant host strains.
• High-Throughput Cultivation: Grow the resulting strains in 96-well deep-well plates with the appropriate medium and induction conditions.
• Screening for Performance and Burden:
  • Measure Product Titer: Use HPLC, GC-MS, or other relevant analytical methods to quantify the final natural product.
  • Proxy for Burden: Measure the final optical density (OD600) of the cultures. A significantly lower OD600 relative to a control strain often indicates high metabolic burden.
• Data Analysis: Identify the host strain that delivers the best balance of high product titer and high final optical density. This strain likely possesses an T7 RNAP expression level that minimizes metabolic burden.

Protocol: Dynamic Monitoring of Metabolic Burden Using Transcriptional Biomarkers

This protocol utilizes biomarker genes to detect and quantify the metabolic load in real-time, allowing for corrective measures during fermentation [59].

Materials and Equipment

• Engineered production strain.
• RNA extraction kit (e.g., Trizol-based).
• cDNA synthesis kit.
• Real-Time PCR system and reagents (e.g., SYBR Green).
• Validated primer pairs for biomarker genes and reference genes (e.g., rpoD).

Procedure

• Strain Cultivation and Sampling: Cultivate the production strain in a bioreactor or shake flasks. Collect cell samples at regular intervals throughout the growth and production phases (e.g., every 2-3 hours).
• RNA Extraction and cDNA Synthesis: For each sample, extract total RNA and synthesize cDNA according to the manufacturer's protocols.
• Quantitative Real-Time PCR (qRT-PCR): Perform qRT-PCR using primers for the pre-validated biomarker genes and housekeeping reference genes.
• Data Calculation and Interpretation:
  • Calculate the relative expression of each biomarker gene using the ΔΔCt method.
  • A significant upregulation of the biomarker genes indicates the onset of high metabolic burden.
• Implementing Feedback: If burden is detected early, operational parameters (e.g., temperature, inducer concentration) can be adjusted to lower expression intensity and mitigate stress.

Workflow Visualization

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow for integrating the fine-tuning strategies and burden monitoring protocols described in this document.

Fine-Tuning and Monitoring Workflow

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 2: Essential Reagents for Fine-Tuning Expression and Metabolic Burden Studies

Reagent / Tool Name	Function / Application	Key Feature / Consideration
pET Expression System	High-level RP expression in E. coli [58].	T7 RNAP-driven; high metabolic burden if unregulated.
Tunable RBS Libraries	Fine-control of translation initiation rate [58].	Can be designed in silico; enables systematic optimization.
Orthogonal T7 RNAP Variants	Separates transcription of synthetic circuit from host [58].	Reduces crosstalk; activity can be modulated by mutations (e.g., A102D) [58].
Synthetic T-Pro Transcription Factors	Implements compressed genetic logic circuits [61].	Reduces circuit size and part count versus inverter-based designs.
Load Stress Biomarker Gene Set	Reports on cellular metabolic burden in real-time [59].	Enables dynamic process control; identified via machine learning on transcriptomics data.
CRISPR/dCas9 Epigenetic Tools (e.g., CRISPRoff)	Provides stable, heritable transcriptional silencing [62].	Useful for long-term repression of specific genes without altering DNA sequence.

The successful refactoring of natural product gene clusters hinges on a holistic approach that integrates predictive design with empirical optimization. By leveraging the synergistic strategies outlined—ranging from foundational promoter selection and RBS tuning to the advanced application of circuit compression and dynamic burden monitoring—researchers can systematically overcome the limitations imposed by metabolic burden. The protocols and reagents detailed in this Application Note provide a actionable roadmap for developing robust microbial cell factories that maintain fitness while achieving high-level, stable production of valuable natural products.

The refactoring of natural product biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) using synthetic biology tools is a powerful strategy for unlocking the potential of silent metabolic pathways. A significant challenge in this field is achieving high-level, controlled expression of these refactored clusters. Recent advances have demonstrated that certain promoters can be modulated by environmental factors, such as specific salts, offering a simple yet powerful lever to optimize gene expression and, consequently, natural product titers. This Application Note details the use of salt-enhanced promoters, a class of condition-responsive genetic elements, for the activation and yield improvement of valuable natural products in heterologous hosts. We provide a consolidated protocol centered on the "kasOp∗-KCl" system, a readily implementable strategy for researchers in natural product discovery and development [16] [63].

Key Research Reagent Solutions

The following table catalogs essential reagents and tools for implementing salt-enhanced promoter strategies in microbial hosts.

Table 1: Key Research Reagents for Salt-Enhanced Promoter Applications

Reagent/Tool	Function/Description	Example/Application in Context
kasOp* Promoter	A constitutive synthetic promoter exhibiting enhanced activity in the presence of potassium or sodium salts [16] [63].	Core driver for heterologous expression of silent BGCs in Streptomyces albus J1074.
Salt Inducers (KCl, NaCl)	Environmental enhancers that boost transcriptional output from specific promoters like kasOp* without genetic modification [16] [63].	Supplemented at ~1% (w/v) in fermentation media to significantly increase product yields.
Heterologous Host (S. albus J1074)	A genetically tractable, fast-growing Streptomyces host with a clear chemical background, ideal for expressing BGCs from hard-to-manipulate native producers [16].	Chassis for BAC-based expression of silent NRPS clusters from marine Streptomyces sp. SCSGAA 0027.
Bacterial Artificial Chromosome (BAC) Vector	A high-capacity cloning vector suitable for capturing and manipulating large, complex biosynthetic gene clusters [16].	pMSBBAC2 used for cloning the ~80 kbp cpm (coprisamide) BGC.
Synthetic Promoter Design (cis-engineering)	An approach to create novel inducible promoters by assembling core promoter sequences with specific cis-regulatory elements (CREs) from stress-responsive genes [64] [65].	Design of a 454 bp synthetic salt-inducible promoter (PS) for plants, demonstrating the transferability of the concept.

Core Experimental Data and Performance

The quantitative effectiveness of the salt-enhanced promoter strategy is demonstrated by the dramatic increase in the production of target natural products.

Table 2: Quantitative Enhancement of Natural Product Yields using the "kasOp*-KCl" Strategy

Natural Product	Host Strain	Promoter	Optimization Condition	Maximum Titer (mg/L)	Fold Improvement	Reference
Coprisamides A/B	S. albus J1074	kasOp*	1% KCl	97.9	~170	[63]
Coprisamides E/F	S. albus J1074	kasOp*	1% KCl	151.8	Not specified (new analogues)	[63]
Padanamide A	S. albus J1074	kasOp*	1% KCl	76.7	Highest reported	[63]
SF2768	S. albus J1074	kasOp*	1% KCl	72.8	Highest reported	[63]
Reporter (eGFP)	S. albus J1074	kasOp*	1% KCl	Significant fluorescence increase	Not specified	[63]

Detailed Experimental Protocol

Protocol: Heterologous Activation and Salt Enhancement of a Silent BGC

This protocol outlines the key steps for activating a silent biosynthetic gene cluster in a heterologous host using the salt-enhanced kasOp* promoter [16] [63].

I. Cloning and Engineering the Target BGC

• BGC Capture: Isolate the target silent BGC from the native producer (e.g., marine Streptomyces sp.) and clone it into a Bacterial Artificial Chromosome (BAC) vector, such as pMSBBAC2, to create a large-insert library.
• Promoter Insertion: Insert the strong constitutive promoter kasOp* upstream of the core biosynthetic gene(s) within the captured BGC on the BAC. This is typically achieved via λ-RED recombinase-mediated recombination or similar techniques to refactor the cluster and ensure strong transcriptional initiation.

II. Heterologous Expression

• Transformation: Introduce the engineered BAC containing the refactored BGC into the heterologous expression host, Streptomyces albus J1074, via protoplast transformation.
• Fermentation and Salt Induction:
  • Inoculate production media (e.g., SYP, SFM, or AM) with transformed S. albus and incubate at 30°C with shaking.
  • At an appropriate growth phase (e.g., at the time of inoculation or at the onset of stationary phase), supplement the fermentation medium with a filter-sterilized solution of KCl to a final concentration of 1% (w/v). NaCl can also be tested, though KCl was reported as most effective.
  • Continue fermentation for a prescribed period (e.g., 5-7 days).

III. Metabolite Analysis and Identification

• Extraction: Extract the culture broth and mycelia with an equal volume of organic solvent (e.g., ethyl acetate).
• Analysis: Concentrate the organic extract and analyze it using High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) or LC-MS to detect new or enhanced metabolite production compared to a no-salt control.
• Purification and Structure Elucidation: Scale up the fermentation, and use guided fractionation (e.g., semi-preparative HPLC) to isolate the compounds. Elucidate their structures using spectroscopic methods, including NMR and HR-MS.

The logical workflow for this protocol, from cluster capture to product identification, is summarized in the following diagram.

Mechanistic Insight and Promoter Engineering

The "kasOp∗-KCl" effect is a prime example of exploiting a promoter's environmental responsiveness. While the precise molecular mechanism of kasOp* salt enhancement in Streptomyces is under investigation, the general principle involves the modulation of promoter strength by external cues, leading to increased transcription of the downstream gene cluster [16] [63]. This discovery opens avenues for engineering other condition-responsive elements.

A parallel approach, demonstrated in plant systems, involves the rational design of synthetic promoters via cis-engineering. This method involves assembling a minimal core promoter with specific, known cis-regulatory elements (CREs) from genes induced by a target stimulus, such as salt stress [64]. The design process involves screening native promoters for relevant CREs, analyzing their copy number, location, and spacing, and synthesizing a compact, optimized synthetic promoter.

Diagram: Two Pathways to a Salt-Responsive Promoter

The successful application of these strategies provides a robust framework for optimizing the expression of refactored gene clusters, enabling higher yields and more efficient discovery of novel bioactive molecules for drug development.

Engineered Cas9 Variants (e.g., Cas9-BD) for Improved Specificity

The CRISPR-Cas9 system has revolutionized genetic engineering, yet its therapeutic and research applications are constrained by off-target effects—the unintended cleavage at genomic sites with sequences similar to the target. This presents a particular challenge when refactoring natural product biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs), where high GC content and repetitive modular sequences in bacterial hosts like Streptomyces significantly increase the risk of erroneous editing [10]. Off-target activity can introduce oncogenic mutations in therapeutic contexts or disrupt essential genes in engineered production strains, ultimately compromising experimental results and product yields [66]. To address these limitations, significant research efforts have focused on engineering novel Cas9 variants with enhanced specificity. This document details the mechanisms, performance data, and application protocols for engineered high-fidelity Cas9 variants, with a specific emphasis on their critical role in the precise refactoring of natural product gene clusters.

Engineered Cas9 Variants and Mechanisms of Improved Specificity

Cas9-BD: A Charge-Modified Variant for High-GC Genomes

The Cas9-BD variant represents an innovative protein engineering strategy designed to mitigate off-target binding in GC-rich genomes. It features the addition of a polyaspartate tail (five aspartate residues, DDDDD) to both the N- and C-termini of the wild-type Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 (SpCas9), connected via a flexible glycine-serine linker [10].

• Mechanism of Action: The primary mechanism involves reducing non-specific charge-charge interactions between the Cas9 protein and the DNA backbone. The native Cas9 protein possesses several basic residues that facilitate binding to the negatively charged DNA phosphate backbone. The engineered polyaspartate tails, being highly acidic, create an electrostatic shield that disproportionately weakens the weaker binding to off-target sites while preserving strong, specific binding to on-target sites [10]. This is particularly beneficial in Streptomyces species and other actinomycetes, which have high GC-content genomes where off-target sites are common.
• Experimental Validation: Circular dichroism spectroscopy confirmed that the addition of polyaspartate tails does not alter the secondary structure of the Cas9 protein or impair its ability to bind single-guide RNA (sgRNA), ensuring core functionality is maintained [10].

CRISPRgenee: A Dual-Action System for Robust Loss-of-Function

Another approach to improve genetic perturbation is CRISPRgenee (CRISPR gene and epigenome engineering), which combines knockout and repression within a single system. It utilizes a fusion of active Cas9 nuclease to a powerful transcriptional repressor, the KRAB domain of ZIM3, and employs two specific sgRNAs to simultaneously cleave a shared exon and repress the target gene's promoter [67].

• Mechanism of Action: This dual-action system ensures a more complete and reproducible loss-of-function phenotype. While CRISPRko (knockout) can lead to residual protein expression due to in-frame DNA repair or alternative splicing, the simultaneous CRISPRi (interference) mediated by dCas9-ZIM3-KRAB silences transcription, overcoming these limitations. The system is designed to increase the overall loss-of-function effect without increasing genotoxic stress, allowing for the use of more compact sgRNA libraries [67].

Other Specificity-Enhancing Strategies

The field has explored multiple parallel strategies to enhance Cas9 specificity, which can be used in conjunction with or independently of protein engineering:

• Truncated sgRNAs: Shortening the sgRNA from the 5'-end to 15-19 nucleotides can impair DNA cleavage activity while maintaining the ability to recruit dCas9-based repressors or activators to the target site, thereby reducing off-target effects [67].
• Computational Guide Selection: In silico algorithms are critical for selecting target sites with minimal sequence homology to other genomic regions, prioritizing unique sequences, and avoiding those with potential off-target sites, especially in the PAM-proximal "seed" region [68] [66].
• Delivery Method Optimization: The form in which the CRISPR system is delivered—such as preassembled Ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complexes—can reduce the time the nuclease is active in the cell, thereby lowering off-target effects [69].

Table 1: Summary of Engineered Cas9 Variants and Key Strategies for Improved Specificity

Variant/Strategy	Core Mechanism	Primary Advantage	Ideal Application Context
Cas9-BD	Polyaspartate tails reduce non-specific DNA binding via electrostatic repulsion.	Dramatically reduced off-target cleavage in high GC-content genomes.	BGC refactoring in Streptomyces and other actinomycetes.
CRISPRgenee	Simultaneous CRISPR knockout and CRISPR interference for dual-layer gene silencing.	Increased loss-of-function efficacy and reproducibility; reduced sgRNA variance.	Essential gene studies and high-resolution screens with compact libraries.
Truncated sgRNAs	Shorter guide sequences reduce cleavage competence but maintain target binding.	Can selectively eliminate nuclease activity while preserving CRISPRi/a functions.	Epigenetic silencing or activation with minimized off-target editing.
RNP Delivery	Direct delivery of pre-complexed Cas9 protein and sgRNA.	Transient activity limits off-target exposure; high editing efficiency.	Primary cells and clinical applications where precision is critical.

Quantitative Performance Data

Rigorous in vitro and in vivo testing demonstrates the superior performance of engineered Cas9 variants.

In Vitro Cleavage Efficiency

A study comparing wild-type SpCas9 with Cas9-BD and related variants (Cas9-ND, -CD) revealed critical insights:

• On-target Efficiency: The modified Cas9s, including Cas9-BD, maintained high on-target DNA cleavage efficiency, showing a reduction of less than 20% compared to wild-type Cas9 [10].
• Off-target Efficiency: Cas9-BD demonstrated a "dramatically reduced" cleavage efficiency against off-target DNAs, including those with non-canonical PAM sequences (e.g., -NGA, -NGT) [10].

In Vivo Editing and Cytotoxicity

In vivo experiments in Streptomyces coelicolor M1146 highlight the practical benefits of Cas9-BD:

• Reduced Cytotoxicity: Transformation with a plasmid expressing wild-type Cas9 under a strong promoter (rpsL) resulted in significant cell death, a common issue in Streptomyces. In contrast, the strain conjugated with the plasmid expressing Cas9-BD showed robust colony growth, indicating markedly lower cytotoxicity [10].
• Enhanced Editing Efficiency: When deleting the matAB genes, the use of Cas9-BD yielded a 77-fold increase in the number of exconjugants compared to wild-type Cas9, while achieving an editing efficiency of 98.1% ± 1.40% [10].
• Fewer Genomic Aberrations: Whole-genome sequencing of edited strains confirmed that Cas9-BD resulted in a lower incidence of off-target mutations compared to the wild-type enzyme [10].

Table 2: Quantitative Performance Comparison of Wild-Type vs. Cas9-BD

Performance Metric	Wild-Type Cas9	Engineered Cas9-BD	Experimental Context
On-target Cleavage	~100% (Baseline)	>80% of wild-type	In vitro cleavage assay [10]
Off-target Cleavage	High	Dramatically reduced	In vitro cleavage assay with non-canonical PAMs [10]
Colony Formation	Low (High cytotoxicity)	High (Low cytotoxicity)	Plasmid transformation in S. coelicolor [10]
Exconjugant Yield	Baseline (1x)	77x higher	matAB gene deletion in S. coelicolor [10]
Editing Efficiency	Not specified	98.1% ± 1.40%	matAB gene deletion in S. coelicolor [10]

Application Notes for BGC Refactoring

The refactoring of silent or poorly expressed BGCs is a cornerstone of modern natural product discovery. Engineered Cas9 variants are instrumental in this process, enabling precise, multiplexed genetic manipulations.

• Multiplexed Promoter Replacement: Cas9-BD and dCas9-BD (the catalytically dead variant) can be used for simultaneous replacement of native promoters in a BGC with synthetic, constitutive, or inducible promoters. This disrupts the native, often complex regulatory network and allows for coordinated activation of all operons within the cluster [4] [10]. Methods like mCRISTAR (multiplexed CRISPR-based Transformation-Associated Recombination) leverage CRISPR/Cas9 to disassemble the cluster into operon fragments in yeast, which are then reassembled with synthetic promoter cassettes via TAR [27] [4].
• Simultaneous BGC Deletion and Knockdown: Cas9-BD's high specificity allows for the targeted deletion of entire BGCs or the simultaneous knockdown of multiple competing metabolic pathway genes via CRISPRi using dCas9-BD. This can channel metabolic flux toward the desired product and minimize the extraction and analysis of unwanted metabolites [10].
• In Vivo BGC Capture: Cas9-BD has been successfully implemented in an in vivo cloning method to capture large BGCs (>100 kb) directly from the Streptomyces genome. The reduced off-target activity of Cas9-BD is critical for this application, as it prevents shearing of the genome at erroneous sites, thereby ensuring the isolation of intact, large DNA fragments for heterologous expression [10].

Detailed Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Multiplexed Promoter Engineering inStreptomycesUsing Cas9-BD

This protocol outlines the steps for replacing native promoters in a BGC with synthetic regulatory cassettes using a Cas9-BD plasmid system.

Materials & Reagents

• pCRISPomyces-2BD plasmid (or similar vector containing Cas9-BD and sgRNA scaffold) [10].
• Streptomyces strain harboring the target BGC.
• Synthetic oligonucleotides for sgRNA template cloning and PCR amplification of promoter cassettes.
• Donor DNA fragments containing synthetic promoters (e.g., strong constitutive promoters like ermE) flanked by homology arms (≥500 bp) specific to the regions upstream of each BGC operon.

Procedure

• sgRNA Design and Cloning:
  • Identify unique 20 bp target sequences within the native promoter regions of the BGC, ensuring the presence of an NGG PAM sequence immediately downstream.
  • Design and synthesize sgRNA oligonucleotides targeting each promoter. Clone these sequentially or as an array into the pCRISPomyces-2BD plasmid.

• Donor DNA Preparation:

  • For each promoter replacement, design a donor DNA construct. This should consist of your chosen synthetic promoter cassette flanked by homology arms that are identical to the sequences immediately upstream and downstream of the CRISPR/Cas9 cut site in the native BGC.
  • Generate these donor fragments via PCR or direct synthesis.

• Transformation:

  • Introduce the constructed pCRISPomyces-2BD plasmid (containing the sgRNA array) and the donor DNA fragments into the Streptomyces host via protoplast transformation or conjugation from E. coli.

• Selection and Screening:

  • Select for exconjugants or transformants using the appropriate antibiotic resistance marker on the plasmid.
  • Screen colonies by PCR and subsequent DNA sequencing to confirm the precise replacement of native promoters with the synthetic cassettes and the loss of the plasmid (to ensure genetic stability).

• Metabolite Analysis:

  • Ferment the successfully engineered strains and analyze metabolite extracts using LC-MS or other relevant analytical methods to detect and quantify the production of the target natural product.

Protocol 2: Assessing Off-Target Activity Using Whole-Genome Sequencing

Validating the specificity of your editing experiment is crucial. The following protocol provides a framework.

Materials & Reagents

• Genomic DNA extraction kit.
• Next-generation sequencing platform (e.g., Illumina).
• Bioinformatics pipelines for variant calling (e.g., BWA, GATK).

Procedure

• Genomic DNA Extraction:
  • Extract high-quality genomic DNA from the edited Streptomyces strain and from a wild-type control strain.

• Library Preparation and Sequencing:

  • Prepare whole-genome sequencing libraries from the extracted DNA according to the manufacturer's instructions for your chosen sequencing platform.
  • Sequence the libraries to a sufficient depth (e.g., 50x coverage) to confidently identify mutations.

• Bioinformatic Analysis:

  • Map the sequenced reads to the reference genome of your Streptomyces host.
  • Perform variant calling to identify single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and insertions/deletions (indels) present in the edited strain but absent in the wild-type control.
  • Filter the list of variants to distinguish potential off-target mutations. Focus on sites that are computationally predicted off-targets for your sgRNAs, or any novel mutations that are not present in the control.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 3: Key Reagents for High-Specificity CRISPR-Cas9 Experiments

Reagent / Tool	Function / Description	Example / Source
Cas9-BD Plasmid	Expression vector for the high-fidelity Cas9 variant with poly-aspartate tails.	pCRISPomyces-2BD [10]
dCas9-BD	Catalytically dead variant of Cas9-BD for CRISPR interference (CRISPRi) without cleavage.	Engineered from Cas9-BD [10]
Synthetic Promoter Library	A collection of well-characterized constitutive or inducible promoters for BGC refactoring.	Fully randomized promoter-RBS libraries [4]
TAR Cloning System	Yeast-based system for assembling large DNA fragments, used in methods like mCRISTAR.	S. cerevisiae strain with high recombination efficiency [27] [4]
Lipid Nanoparticles (LNPs)	Non-viral delivery vector for in vivo delivery of CRISPR components; targets liver cells.	Used in clinical trials (e.g., Intellia's hATTR therapy) [70] [71]
Off-Target Prediction Software	In silico tool for designing sgRNAs with minimal potential off-target sites.	Various algorithms (e.g., from [68] [66])

Engineered Cas9 variants like Cas9-BD represent a significant leap forward in achieving the precision required for advanced genetic engineering tasks, particularly the refactoring of biosynthetic gene clusters. By leveraging electrostatic repulsion to reduce off-target effects, Cas9-BD enables efficient and reliable multiplexed genome editing in challenging hosts like Streptomyces. The integration of these high-fidelity tools with robust protocols for promoter engineering and off-target validation provides a powerful framework for activating silent metabolic pathways and accelerating the discovery of novel natural products. As the field progresses, the combination of such specific nucleases with sophisticated delivery systems and regulatory elements will undoubtedly unlock new frontiers in synthetic biology and therapeutic development.

Case Studies and Performance Metrics in Strain Engineering

Refactoring natural product biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) through synthetic biology has emerged as a powerful strategy to overcome bottlenecks in drug discovery and development. This approach addresses key challenges such as low production titers and silent gene clusters that are not expressed under standard laboratory conditions. Using daptomycin—a critical last-resort antibiotic against multidrug-resistant Gram-positive pathogens—as a primary case study, this application note details how integrated metabolic engineering and synthetic promoter design can dramatically enhance the yield and quality of clinically vital compounds. We present quantitative data from a successful multilevel engineering campaign in Streptomyces roseosporus, alongside generalized protocols for BGC refactoring that can be applied to novel compound discovery.

The declining discovery rate of novel antibiotics and the escalating crisis of antimicrobial resistance necessitate innovative approaches to natural product exploitation. A significant obstacle is that many BGCs are either transcriptionally silent or poorly expressed in native hosts, a phenomenon that promoter engineering and pathway refactoring aim to overcome [4]. This document outlines a proven, multilevel strategy, using the yield enhancement of the lipopeptide antibiotic daptomycin as a benchmark success story. The protocols described herein provide a framework for activating and optimizing the production of valuable natural products in both native and heterologous hosts.

Case Study: Multilevel Engineering for Daptomycin Overproduction

Despite its clinical importance, daptomycin production by wild-type Streptomyces roseosporus remains low, making it a prime target for metabolic engineering. A recent study achieved a landmark improvement by systematically refactoring the producer strain through five distinct engineering levels [72] [73].

Quantitative Outcomes of Multilevel Engineering

The following table summarizes the progressive enhancement of daptomycin titer achieved at each stage of the engineering process, culminating in a 565% increase in shake flasks and a final titer of 786 mg/L in a 15-L fermenter [72].

Table 1: Daptomycin Titer Improvement via Multilevel Metabolic Engineering

Engineering Level	Specific Modification	Strain Designation	Daptomycin Titer (mg/L)	Fold Increase (vs. L2790)
Starting Strain	None (Parent strain)	L2790	17	1x
Level 1	Precursor engineering: Enhanced kynurenine supply	L2791	25	1.5x
Level 2	Regulatory engineering: Deletion of arpA and phaR	L2793	42	2.5x
Level 3	Byproduct engineering: Removal of red pigment	L2795	68	4.0x
Level 4	Gene dosage: Integration of extra daptomycin BGC copy	L2797	93	5.5x
Level 5	Process engineering: Heterologous expression of VHb	L2797-VHb	113 (786 in fermenter)	6.7x (46x in fermenter)

This systematic approach demonstrates the synergistic effect of combining multiple engineering strategies, far surpassing what is typically achievable by optimizing a single factor.

Experimental Protocol: Multilevel Strain Engineering inStreptomyces roseosporus

This protocol details the key genetic manipulations used to construct the high-yielding daptomycin strain L2797-VHb [72].

Materials

• Strains: Streptomyces roseosporus L2790 (parent strain). E. coli TG1 for general cloning. E. coli ET12567/pUZ8002 for conjugation with Streptomyces.
• Vectors: pKC1139-based knockout vectors, CRISPR/Cpf1-mediated gene-editing system, pSET152-based integrating vectors for BGC copy number increase and VHb expression.
• Media: TSB (Tryptic Soya Broth) for seed culture. Fermentation medium containing maltodextrin, yeast powder, and glucose.

Methodology

• Precursor Engineering (Refactoring the Kynurenine Pathway)

  • Objective: Increase the intracellular pool of kynurenine (Kyn), a key non-proteinogenic amino acid precursor in daptomycin biosynthesis.
  • Procedure:
    • Identify and knockout genes orf3242 and orf3244 (predicted to be involved in diverting Kyn away from daptomycin biosynthesis) using CRISPR/Cpf1 and homologous recombination, respectively.
    • Use a temperature-sensitive plasmid (e.g., pKC1139) with upstream and downstream homologous arms of the target gene for gene replacement via conjugation.
    • Confirm gene deletion by PCR and sequencing.

• Regulatory Pathway Reconstruction

  • Objective: Remove transcriptional repression of the daptomycin BGC.
  • Procedure:
    • Knock out the negative regulatory genes arpA (an A-factor receptor homolog) and phaR (a transcriptional regulator) using the same homologous recombination strategy as in Step 1.
    • Double mutants are selected and verified.

• Byproduct Engineering (Pigment Removal)

  • Objective: Simplify downstream purification and potentially redirect metabolic flux.
  • Procedure:
    • Partially knockout genes (orf3265 and orf3266) involved in the biosynthetic pathway of a red pigment.
    • Select mutant strains exhibiting a colorless or pale phenotype.

• Multicopy Biosynthetic Gene Cluster Integration

  • Objective: Increase the genetic dosage of the daptomycin BGC.
  • Procedure:
    • Clone the ~65 kb daptomycin BGC into an integrative vector.
    • Introduce the vector into the engineered strain (e.g., L2795) via intergeneric conjugation from E. coli ET12567/pUZ8002.
    • Select for exconjugants and verify genomic integration.

• Fermentation Process Engineering (Heterologous VHb Expression)

  • Objective: Enhance oxygen utilization efficiency under fermentation conditions.
  • Procedure:
    • Clone the gene for vitreous hemoglobin (VHb) into an expression vector.
    • Integrate and express the VHb gene in the final engineered strain (L2797).
    • Conduct fed-batch fermentation in a 15-L bioreactor with optimized aeration and agitation to leverage the improved oxygen-binding capacity.

Validation: Daptomycin titers at each stage should be quantified using HPLC. The final strain's performance is validated in a controlled bioreactor environment [72].

Protocols for BGC Refactoring and Novel Compound Discovery

The principles applied to daptomycin can be generalized for the activation and optimization of other BGCs. The core strategy involves replacing native regulatory elements with synthetic, well-characterized parts to achieve predictable and high-level expression.

Experimental Protocol: Multiplex Promoter Engineering via mCRISTAR

This protocol describes a method for the simultaneous replacement of multiple native promoters within a BGC using multiplexed CRISPR-based Transformation-Associated Recombination (mCRISTAR) [4].

Materials

• Cloning Host: Saccharomyces cerevisiae (yeast) for in vivo assembly via homologous recombination.
• Tools: CRISPR-Cas9 system for targeted linearization of the BGC-containing vector.
• DNA Parts: A library of synthetic regulatory cassettes (promoter-RBS combinations). PCR-generated homology arms for targeted integration.

Methodology

• Design: Identify all native promoters in the target BGC. Select a set of orthogonal synthetic promoters with varying strengths from a randomized library.
• Amplify Parts: Amplify the chosen synthetic promoter-RBS cassettes with 40-60 bp homology arms that flank the region targeted for replacement in the BGC.
• Co-transform: Linearize the vector containing the silent or sub-optimally expressed BGC using CRISPR-Cas9. Co-transform this linearized vector, the synthetic promoter cassettes, and the necessary assembly machinery into yeast.
• Select and Validate: Select for yeast colonies that have successfully reassembled a functional plasmid. Isolate the plasmid and verify the correct insertion of all synthetic promoters by PCR and sequencing.
• Heterologous Expression: Introduce the refactored BGC into a suitable heterologous host, such as Streptomyces albus J1074, and screen for metabolite production.

This method was successfully used to activate the silent actinorhodin BGC in a heterologous host by replacing seven native promoters with four strong synthetic regulatory cassettes [4].

Visualizing the Refactoring Workflow

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow and key decision points in the BGC refactoring pipeline for novel compound discovery and yield improvement.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 2: Key Reagents for BGC Refactoring and Metabolic Engineering

Reagent / Tool	Function & Application	Specific Examples
Synthetic Promoter Libraries	Provides orthogonal, tunable transcriptional control for refactoring BGCs; avoids host regulatory cross-talk.	Completely randomized promoter-RBS cassettes in S. albus [4]; Metagenomically-mined universal promoters [4].
CRISPR-Cas/Cpf1 Systems	Enables precise gene knockouts (e.g., regulators, byproduct pathways) and facilitates multiplex gene editing.	CRISPR/Cpf1 for deleting orf3242 in S. roseosporus [72]; mCRISTAR for promoter replacement [4].
Vectors for BGC Cloning	Captures large DNA fragments (>50 kb) for heterologous expression and refactoring.	BAC, FAC vectors; pSC101-BAD-ETgA-tet for direct cloning [72].
Optimized Heterologous Hosts	Provides a clean genetic background for expression of refactored BGCs, free from native regulation.	Streptomyces albus J1074, S. coelicolor M511 [72] [4].
Vitreous Hemoglobin (VHb)	Enhances oxygen utilization under oxygen-limited fermentation conditions, improving final titer.	Heterologous expression in S. roseosporus for daptomycin production [72].

The successful multilevel engineering of Streptomyces roseosporus for daptomycin overproduction stands as a testament to the power of systematic BGC refactoring. This application note demonstrates that integrating precursor engineering, deregulation of transcriptional control, byproduct elimination, increased gene dosage, and fermentation optimization can lead to dramatic yield improvements. Furthermore, the development of sophisticated tools like orthogonal promoter libraries and multiplexed CRISPR-assisted refactoring protocols provides a robust and generalizable framework. These strategies are directly applicable to the activation of silent gene clusters and the discovery of novel bioactive compounds, paving the way for a new generation of natural product-based therapeutics.

In the field of natural product research, refactoring biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) with synthetic promoters has emerged as a powerful synthetic biology approach to activate silent gene clusters and optimize the production of valuable metabolites [4]. This strategy is particularly vital for drug development, as microbial natural products and their derivatives play a significant role in pharmaceutical discovery due to their rich chemical diversity and bioactivity [4]. Quantifying the success of these interventions through precise measurement of fold-increases in metabolite production provides critical data for evaluating strategy effectiveness, enabling comparison across different engineering approaches, and determining economic feasibility for industrial application.

The transition from traditional native host fermentation to refactored systems represents a paradigm shift in natural product access. While conventional fermentation depends on intrinsic regulatory elements and can be limited by low yields or instabilities due to geographical, seasonal, and environmental variations [74], refactoring allows researchers to bypass native regulation. By replacing natural promoters with constitutive or readily inducible synthetic promoters, scientists can disrupt inherent transcriptional controls that often silence BGC expression under laboratory conditions [4]. This approach has become increasingly important with the recognition that the majority of native BGCs—approximately 90%—remain transcriptionally silent or are only partially expressed under standard cultivation methods [4].

Quantitative Data on Metabolite Production Enhancement

Documented Fold-Increases from Refactoring and Optimization

Table 1: Documented Fold-Increases in Metabolite Production through Various Optimization Strategies

Metabolite	Producing System	Optimization Strategy	Fold-Increase	Reference
4-(diethylamino) salicylaldehyde (DSA)	Streptomyces sp. KN37 fermentation	Medium & condition optimization via RSM	16.28×	[75]
N-(2,4-dimethylphenyl) formamide (NDMPF)	Streptomyces sp. KN37 fermentation	Medium & condition optimization via RSM	6.35×	[75]
Ricinoleic acid	Schizosaccharomyces pombe	Phospholipase A gene overexpression	~10×	[76]
Free fatty acids	Aspergillus oryzae	Fatty acid synthase gene overexpression	2.8×	[76]
Fatty acids	Mucor circinelloides	Malic enzyme gene overexpression (NADPH increase)	Significant (specific fold not stated)	[76]
Actinorhodin	Streptomyces coelicolor BGC in S. albus	Promoter replacement (7 native promoters replaced)	Successful activation from silent state	[4]
Atolypenes A and B	Silent BGC	miCRISTAR-mediated activation	Successful activation from silent state	[4]

Table 2: Production Enhancement Strategies for Primary vs. Secondary Metabolites

Strategy	Primary Metabolites	Secondary Metabolites
Gene overexpression	Enhanced expression of genes involved in synthesis (e.g., FAS genes in A. oryzae for fatty acids)	Refactoring silent BGCs via promoter replacement [4]
Pathway knockout	Knockout of degradation/conversion reactions (e.g., in E. coli for fatty acids) [76]	Not typically applied (clusters often silent)
Cofactor optimization	Increased production of essential coenzymes (ATP, NADH, NADPH) [76]	Not typically applied
Product secretion	Discharge of final metabolites to reduce cellular stress [76]	Culture condition optimization [75]
Culture optimization	Less emphasis compared to genetic approaches	Critical enhancement method (e.g., RSM in Streptomyces) [75]

Key Quantitative Analysis Methods

Table 3: Analytical Methods for Quantifying Metabolite Production Enhancement

Method	Application in Quantification	Key Metrics Measured
HPLC-MS/MS	Precise quantification of metabolite concentration changes [75]	Peak areas, retention times, mass spectra
Transcriptomic analysis	Elucidation of molecular mechanisms behind production changes [75]	Gene expression fold-changes (e.g., SALD downregulation to 0.48×) [75]
Antifungal activity bioassays	Functional assessment of enhanced production in biocontrol strains [75]	Inhibition rate percentage increase (e.g., from 27.33% to 59.53%) [75]
Fermentation monitoring	Biomass and metabolite yield tracking throughout optimization [75]	Dry weight, titration curves, temporal production profiles

Experimental Protocols

BGC Refactoring with Synthetic Promoters

Protocol: Multiplex Promoter Replacement via CRISPR-TAR

Purpose: To simultaneously replace multiple native promoters in a BGC with synthetic promoters to activate silent clusters or optimize expression.

Materials:

• Yeast strain with high recombination efficiency (e.g., Saccharomyces cerevisiae)
• CRISPR-TAR system components (Cas9, gRNAs, TAR vectors)
• Synthetic promoter library with varying strengths
• BGC source (genomic DNA, cosmid, or synthesized fragments)
• Heterologous expression hosts (e.g., Streptomyces albus J1074, Myxococcus xanthus DK1622)

Procedure:

• BGC Cloning: Clone target BGC into appropriate vector using transformation-associated recombination (TAR) in yeast [4].
• gRNA Design: Design guide RNAs targeting native promoter regions of essential BGC genes.
• Promoter Donor Preparation: Prepare donor DNA containing synthetic promoters flanked by homology arms matching regions adjacent to native promoters.
• Multiplex Editing: Co-transform yeast with CRISPR components and promoter donor DNA using:
  • mCRISTAR for multiplexed CRISPR-based TAR [4]
  • miCRISTAR for multiplexed in vitro CRISPR-based TAR [4]
  • mpCRISTAR for multiple plasmid-based CRISPR-based TAR [4]
• Screening: Select and screen clones for successful promoter replacements via colony PCR and sequencing.
• Heterologous Expression: Introduce refactored BGC into heterologous host and evaluate metabolite production.

Validation:

• Compare metabolite production before and after refactoring using HPLC-MS/MS [75]
• Assess expression levels of key BGC genes via transcriptomic analysis [75]

BGC Refactoring Workflow

Fermentation Optimization for Enhanced Metabolite Production

Protocol: Response Surface Methodology for Fermentation Optimization

Purpose: To systematically optimize fermentation conditions for maximizing metabolite production yields.

Materials:

• Producer strain (e.g., Streptomyces sp. KN37)
• Basal fermentation medium components
• Plackett-Burman Design (PBD) software (e.g., Design-Expert)
• Central Composite Design (CCD) software
• Shaking incubators with temperature control
• HPLC-MS/MS system for metabolite quantification

Procedure:

• Initial Screening (Plackett-Burman Design):
  • Select factors for screening (carbon sources, nitrogen sources, minerals, physical conditions)
  • Design PBD experiment with 12-20 runs evaluating multiple factors at two levels
  • Inoculate fermentation cultures according to design
  • Incubate under specified conditions (e.g., 25°C, 150 rpm, 9 days for Streptomyces KN37) [75]
  • Quantify metabolite production and biological activity
  • Identify significant factors using statistical analysis (Pareto chart)

• Path Optimization (Central Composite Design):

  • Select 2-3 most significant factors from PBD analysis
  • Design CCD experiment with center points and axial points
  • Conduct fermentations across the experimental design space
  • Measure response variables (metabolite yield, inhibition activity)

• Model Fitting and Validation:

  • Fit quadratic model to experimental data
  • Identify optimal factor levels using response surface analysis
  • Validate model predictions with confirmation experiments

Validation:

• Compare metabolite production before and after optimization using HPLC-MS/MS [75]
• Calculate fold-increases for target metabolites [75]

Fermentation Optimization Process

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 4: Essential Research Reagents for Metabolite Production Enhancement

Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Function in Metabolite Enhancement
Synthetic Promoter Libraries	Randomized 5' regulatory sequences [4], Constitutive promoters (PermE, kasOp)	Replace native promoters in BGCs to disrupt natural regulation and enhance expression
Heterologous Hosts	Streptomyces albus J1074 [4], Myxococcus xanthus DK1622, Burkholderia sp. DSM7029 [4]	Provide clean genetic background for expressing refactored BGCs with minimal native interference
Fermentation Medium Components	Millet [75], Yeast extract [75], K₂HPO₄ [75]	Optimized nutrient sources that significantly enhance secondary metabolite production
Genetic Engineering Tools	CRISPR-TAR systems [4], Yeast homologous recombination [4]	Enable precise refactoring of large BGCs through multiplex promoter replacement
Analytical Standards	4-(diethylamino) salicylaldehyde [75], N-(2,4-dimethylphenyl) formamide [75]	Reference compounds for accurate quantification of fold-increases via HPLC-MS/MS

The strategic refactoring of natural product gene clusters with synthetic promoters represents a transformative approach in microbial natural product research, consistently delivering substantial fold-increases in metabolite production. The documented successes—ranging from 6.35-fold to over 16-fold enhancements—demonstrate the profound impact of systematically optimizing both genetic elements and fermentation parameters. These quantitative improvements directly translate to enhanced feasibility for pharmaceutical development, where consistent, high-yield production is essential for preclinical and clinical evaluation.

The integration of synthetic biology tools with traditional fermentation optimization creates a powerful synergy for accessing microbial chemical diversity. As heterologous expression systems become more sophisticated and promoter engineering techniques more precise, the capacity to awaken silent biosynthetic potential will continue to accelerate natural product discovery. The precise quantification of success through fold-increase measurements provides an essential metric for prioritizing refactoring strategies and advancing the most promising candidates toward drug development pipelines.

Comparative Analysis of Refactoring Techniques and Their Efficiencies

Refactoring biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) is a cornerstone of synthetic biology, enabling the activation of silent natural product pathways and optimization of yield for drug discovery [4]. This analysis compares modern BGC refactoring techniques, emphasizing quantitative efficiencies, experimental protocols, and reagent solutions tailored for researchers and drug development professionals.

---

Quantitative Comparison of Refactoring Techniques

The table below summarizes the efficiencies, applications, and limitations of prominent BGC refactoring methods:

Table 1: Key BGC Refactoring Techniques and Efficiencies

Technique	Efficiency/Activation Rate	Primary Application	Limitations
Completely Randomized Synthetic Promoters [4]	~90% activation of silent BGCs in Streptomyces albus	Multiplex promoter engineering; heterologous expression	Requires host-specific optimization; potential homologous recombination
mCRISTAR/miCRISTAR [4]	Simultaneous replacement of up to 8 promoters; high-throughput cloning	Rapid activation of silent BGCs (e.g., discovery of atolypenes)	Dependent on yeast homologous recombination (YHR); complex workflow
Orthogonal Transcriptional Modules [4]	Wide host range (across Actinobacteria, Proteobacteria, etc.)	Cross-species BGC refactoring	Limited validation in non-model hosts
TALE-Based Stabilized Promoters [4]	Constant expression under stress; copy-number-independent yield	Metabolic pathway optimization in E. coli	Engineering complexity; species-specific design
Metagenomic Promoter Mining [4]	184 natural promoters characterized for universal use	Accessing novel BGCs from underexplored taxa (e.g., microbiomes)	Lower predictability in non-native hosts

---

Experimental Protocols for BGC Refactoring

Protocol 1: Randomized Promoter Engineering for BGC Activation

Objective: Replace native promoters in a BGC with synthetic constitutive promoters to overcome transcriptional silencing. Steps:

• Design Synthetic Promoters: Randomize sequences in the promoter and ribosomal binding site (RBS) regions, partially fixing -10/-35 boxes and Shine-Dalgarno sequences [4].
• Clone into Reporter System: Use a visible reporter (e.g., indigoidine synthetase) in a heterologous host (e.g., S. albus).
• Screen Libraries: Quantify promoter strength via metabolite yield or fluorescence. Select strong/medium/weak promoters for orthogonal control.
• BGC Refactoring: Replace all native BGC promoters with selected synthetic cassettes using yeast homologous recombination (e.g., miCRISTAR).
• Heterologous Expression: Transfer refactored BGC into optimized hosts (e.g., M. xanthus); monitor compound production via LC-MS.

Validation: Compare metabolite yields before and after refactoring; use RNA-seq to verify transcriptional activation.

Protocol 2: CRISPR-TAR for Multiplex Promoter Replacement

Objective: Simultaneously replace multiple promoters in a large BGC (>50 kb) for high-throughput activation. Steps:

• Design gRNA Arrays: Target 5–8 native promoter regions with CRISPR-Cas9 gRNAs.
• In Vitro Assembly (miCRISTAR): Combine gRNAs, donor DNA (synthetic promoters), and BGC DNA in a yeast system for recombination.
• Screen Clones: Select colonies via auxotrophic markers; validate promoter swaps via PCR and sequencing.
• Express in Heterologous Hosts: Introduce refactored BGC into a panel of hosts (e.g., Burkholderia sp.) to assess yield under varied physiologies. Efficiency Metrics: Count activated clones per 100 transformations; measure sesterterpene yields (e.g., atolypenes) [4].

---

Visualization of Workflows

Diagram 1: BGC Refactoring Pipeline for Drug Discovery

Title: BGC Refactoring Workflow for Natural Product Discovery

Diagram 2: Orthogonal Promoter Engineering

Title: Promoter Engineering Strategies for BGC Activation

---

Research Reagent Solutions

Table 2: Essential Reagents for BGC Refactoring Experiments

Reagent/Material	Function	Example Use Case
Synthetic Promoter Libraries [4]	Replace native regulators; tune expression	Randomized cassettes for Streptomyces BGCs
Yeast Homologous Recombination (YHR) Systems	Multiplex promoter swapping in large BGCs	miCRISTAR for 8-promoter replacement
Orthogonal RBS/Promoter Sets [4]	Cross-species expression control	Metagenomic elements for Burkholderia and E. coli
TALE-Based iFFL Modules [4]	Stabilize expression under metabolic stress	Copy-independent production in E. coli
Reporter Systems (e.g., Indigoidine)	Quantify promoter strength in vivo	High-throughput screening of synthetic libraries
Heterologous Hosts (e.g., S. albus)	BGC expression in minimized backgrounds	Chassis for actinorhodin production [4]

---

Refactoring techniques like randomized promoter engineering and CRISPR-TAR significantly enhance BGC activation efficiencies, enabling rapid natural product discovery. Integrating orthogonal regulators and stabilized expression systems aligns with synthetic biology principles to overcome host-specific limitations. These protocols and reagents provide a roadmap for scalable drug development.

The transition of therapeutic candidates from laboratory research to clinical application is a complex and high-attrition process. The reliability of this translation is fundamentally dependent on the scientific validity of the preclinical models used in the discovery and testing phases. For researchers engineering natural product biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) in actinomycetes, the challenge is not only to maximize product titers but also to demonstrate that any discovered or optimized compound will have predictive biological relevance in a human physiological context. This document outlines the core concepts of preclinical model validation and provides detailed protocols to integrate these principles into a research workflow focused on refactoring natural product gene clusters with synthetic promoters.

Foundational Concepts of Model Validity

The validation of animal models for preclinical research relies on a framework designed to assess how well the model represents human disease. The most widely accepted criteria for this external validation are predictive, face, and construct validity [77]. These concepts provide a structured approach to evaluate a model's translational potential.

• Predictive Validity: This measures how well a model can forecast unknown aspects of the human condition, particularly the response to therapeutic intervention. It is often considered the most critical criterion in drug discovery. A model with high predictive validity should correctly identify compounds that will be efficacious and safe in humans, as well as those that will not. For example, the 6-OHDA rodent model is used in Parkinson's disease research based on its correlation with therapeutic outcomes [77].
• Face Validity: This refers to the phenomenological similarity between the model and the human disease. It assesses how well the model replicates the symptoms, signs, and pathology observed in patients. The MPTP non-human primate model for Parkinson's disease, which recapitulates many of the motor symptoms seen in humans, is a classic example of a model with strong face validity [77].
• Construct Validity: This is the degree to which a model aligns with the current understanding of the underlying etiology and biological mechanisms of the human disease. A model with high construct validity uses an induction method that mirrors the known human disease pathophysiology. Transgenic mice, such as the Smm1 and hSmn2 transgenic mice for Spinal Muscular Atrophy, which are based on human genetic constructs, exemplify strong construct validity [77].

It is crucial to understand that no single animal model is universal and no model perfectly fulfills all three validity criteria. A model may have strong predictive validity but completely lack face validity, or vice versa. Therefore, the research objective should dictate which aspect of validity is most critical, and a multifactorial approach using complementary models is often necessary for a robust preclinical assessment [77].

Table 1: Core Criteria for Animal Model Validation

Validity Type	Definition	Key Question	Example Model
Predictive Validity	How well the model predicts therapeutic outcomes in humans.	"Will efficacy in this model translate to patients?"	6-OHDA Rodent Model (Parkinson's) [77]
Face Validity	How well the model resembles the human disease phenotype.	"Does the model look like the human disease?"	MPTP Non-Human Primate Model (Parkinson's) [77]
Construct Validity	How well the model's mechanism mirrors known human disease biology.	"Does the model's cause mimic the human condition?"	Smn1/hSmn2 Transgenic Mice (Spinal Muscular Atrophy) [77]

Quantitative Frameworks: Internal vs. External Validity

Beyond the specific criteria for animal models, the broader quality of a research study is governed by its internal and external validity. These concepts are central to quantitative research design and hierarchy of evidence [78] [79].

• Internal Validity is the extent to which a study establishes a trustworthy cause-and-effect relationship. It is concerned with the rigor of the study's design, conduct, and analysis, ensuring that observed effects are due to the intervention and not confounding factors like bias or external events. Key threats include history, instrumentation, selection bias, and attrition [78].
• External Validity refers to the generalizability of the research findings to other settings, populations, or species. In translational research, this is the applicability of preclinical results to the human clinical condition [78] [79].

A study must be internally valid for its results to have any claim to external validity; findings that are not reliable within their own context cannot be reliably applied elsewhere [80]. However, a strong internal validity does not guarantee successful translation, as limitations in external validity can still prevent bench findings from reaching the bedside.

Table 2: Threats to Internal and External Validity in Preclinical Research

Category	Threat	Definition	Impact on Translation
Internal Validity [78]	Selection Bias	Systematic differences between groups before the study.	Differences in outcomes may be due to pre-existing conditions rather than the intervention.
	History	External events occurring during the study.	Changes in outcomes may be caused by external factors, not the independent variable.
	Attrition	Loss of participants over the course of the study.	Results may not be representative of the original population.
External Validity [78] [80]	Species Differences	Fundamental biological differences between animals and humans.	Undermines the core premise of translation; an insurmountable limitation for some targets.
	Unrepresentative Samples	Use of young, healthy, homogenous animal populations.	Findings may not apply to older, comorbid, and genetically diverse human patients.
	Artificial Settings	Laboratory conditions that do not mimic human disease onset or clinical treatment timelines.	Reduces the real-world applicability of the intervention (e.g., prophylactic vs. therapeutic treatment).

Critical Barriers to External Validity in Translation

Despite rigorous experimental design, several factors persistently challenge the external validity of preclinical models. A primary issue is the unrepresentativeness of animal samples. Laboratory animals are often young, healthy, and genetically homogeneous, housed in standardized conditions that do not reflect the diverse genetic backgrounds, ages, comorbidities, and environmental exposures of human patient populations [80]. For instance, animal studies of stroke or osteoarthritis frequently use young, otherwise healthy subjects, whereas these conditions predominantly affect older humans, often with concurrent health issues like hypertension or obesity [80].

Furthermore, many animal models lack the complexity of human diseases. While they may replicate certain aspects of a condition, they often fail to capture its progressive, chronic nature, the common reality of polypharmacy, or the presence of multiple comorbidities [80]. The artificiality of the laboratory setting also extends to intervention timing; drugs are often administered to animals prophylactically or at disease onset, whereas humans are typically treated after a disease is established, creating a significant applicability gap [80].

The most profound and potentially insurmountable challenge to external validity is species differences. Fundamental differences in genetics, physiology, metabolism, and immunology between animals and humans mean that responses to therapeutic interventions can vary dramatically. This uncertainty means that "preclinical animal models can never be fully valid" and will always be a source of risk in the drug development pipeline [80]. This underscores the necessity of using human-relevant models where possible and interpreting animal data with appropriate caution.

Experimental Protocols for Validating Models in Natural Product Research

Protocol 5.1: Establishing a Workflow for Model Selection and Validation

Diagram 1: A systematic workflow for selecting and validating preclinical models.

Objective: To provide a systematic approach for selecting and validating appropriate preclinical models for testing natural products derived from refactored biosynthetic gene clusters.

Materials:

• Candidate natural product compound
• Literature on relevant disease models
• Animal models (e.g., transgenic, xenograft, induced-disease)
• Cell-based assays (primary human cells, cell lines)

Procedure:

• Define the Research Question: Clearly state the compound's proposed mechanism of action (MOA) and target disease.
• Conduct a Validity Triad Review:
  • Construct Validity: Prioritize models where the disease induction method aligns with the human mechanism your compound targets (e.g., a transgenic model with a humanized target for a targeted therapy).
  • Face Validity: If the disease phenotype is complex, select a model that recapitulates key symptomatic or histological features you aim to modulate.
  • Predictive Validity: Give the most weight to models with a documented history of correctly predicting clinical outcomes for compounds with a similar MOA or chemical class.
• Select Primary Model: Choose the single model that best balances the three validity criteria for your primary efficacy study.
• Incorporate Internal Validity Controls:
  • Randomization: Randomly assign animals to treatment and control groups.
  • Blinding: Ensure the personnel administering treatments and assessing outcomes are blinded to group assignments.
  • Power Analysis: Pre-determine sample sizes using statistical power analysis to ensure the study is capable of detecting a meaningful effect.
  • Control Groups: Include appropriate vehicle controls and, if available, a standard-of-care positive control.
• Conduct the Primary Study.
• Analyze and Interpret Results: Contextualize findings within the known limitations of the model's validity.
• Confirm in a Secondary Model: Validate key findings in a complementary model that differs in its strengths/weaknesses within the validity triad (e.g., confirm a result from a model with high construct validity in one with higher predictive validity).
• Make a Go/No-Go Decision: Based on the convergent evidence from multiple models, decide whether the compound merits progression to the next stage of development.

Protocol 5.2: A TieredIn VivoEfficacy Testing Protocol for an Anti-Cancer Natural Product

Diagram 2: A tiered in vivo efficacy testing strategy for oncology applications.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of a novel anti-cancer natural product using a tiered approach that progressively increases clinical relevance and model complexity.

Materials:

• Test compound (purified natural product)
• Cancer cell lines
• Immunodeficient mice (e.g., NOD-scid gamma, NSG)
• Patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models
• Immunocompetent mice and syngeneic cell lines
• Genetically engineered mouse models (GEMMs) or humanized mouse models
• Calipers, in vivo imaging system (e.g., IVIS), materials for immunohistochemistry

Procedure:

• Tier 1 - Subcutaneous Xenograft Model:
  • Purpose: Initial, high-throughput efficacy screening.
  • Procedure: Inoculate immunodeficient mice subcutaneously with human cancer cells. Once tumors are palpable, randomize mice into treatment and control groups. Administer compound and monitor tumor volume regularly.
  • Validity Assessment: This model has low face/construct validity (ectopic location, simplified microenvironment) but is cost-effective for initial screening [77] [80].

• Tier 2 - Orthotopic or Patient-Derived Xenograft (PDX) Model:

  • Purpose: Assess efficacy in a more physiologically relevant context.
  • Procedure: Implant cancer cells or patient-derived tumor fragments into the organ of origin (orthotopic) in immunodeficient mice. Treat and monitor tumor growth and metastasis using in vivo imaging.
  • Validity Assessment: Higher face and construct validity due to the correct tumor microenvironment and retention of human tumor histology/genetics [77].

• Tier 3 - Immunocompetent Syngeneic Model:

  • Purpose: Evaluate efficacy in the presence of a functional immune system.
  • Procedure: Implant murine cancer cells into immunocompetent mice of the same genetic background. Treat and monitor as before.
  • Validity Assessment: Provides critical construct validity for immunomodulatory compounds, which is entirely absent in immunodeficient models [80].

• Tier 4 - Genetically Engineered Mouse Model (GEMM) or Humanized Model:

  • Purpose: Test efficacy in a model of de novo tumorigenesis or in a humanized immune context.
  • Procedure: Use mice that spontaneously develop tumors due to genetic alterations, or immunodeficient mice engrafted with human immune cells. Treat prophylactically or therapeutically.
  • Validity Assessment: Offers the highest construct validity for specific genetic drivers or for studying human-specific immune responses [77].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for Preclinical Validation

Reagent / Model Type	Function in Validation	Key Characteristics & Considerations
Synthetic Promoters [40]	To drive optimized or constitutive expression of silent or low-yield biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) in actinomycetes.	Enables titration of gene expression; crucial for producing sufficient compound for in vivo testing. A key technique in refactoring BGCs.
Patient-Derived Xenograft (PDX) Models [77]	To test compound efficacy on actual human tumor tissue in an in vivo environment.	Retains tumor heterogeneity and histology of the original patient tumor; improves predictive and face validity over cell line-derived xenografts.
Genetically Engineered Mouse Models (GEMMs) [77]	To study therapeutic effects in a model where disease arises spontaneously from defined genetic alterations.	High construct validity for diseases with known genetic drivers; models the complexity of tumor-immune interactions.
Humanized Mouse Models [77] [80]	To evaluate therapies, especially biologics or immunotherapies, in the context of a human immune system.	Provides a critical bridge for evaluating human-specific drug effects and immune responses, addressing a major species difference limitation.
Isogenic Cell Line Pairs	To conduct mechanistically clean in vitro target validation.	Pair consists of a wild-type and a specific gene knockout (e.g., via CRISPR), allowing direct assessment of on-target effects.

Application Notes

The refactoring of natural product biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) using synthetic promoters is a cornerstone of modern synthetic biology, enabling the activation of silent gene clusters and the optimization of pathway yields for drug discovery. The integration of AI-generated protein editors and advanced clinical translation protocols is poised to revolutionize this field, making the process more predictive, efficient, and scalable.

Table 1: Key Challenges and AI-Driven Solutions in BGC Refactoring and Translation

Challenge Area	Specific Challenge	AI-Generated Solution	Impact on Research
BGC Refactoring	Activation of transcriptionally silent BGCs [4]	AI-designed synthetic promoters and CRISPR-based tools (e.g., mCRISTAR) for multiplexed promoter engineering [4]	Enables discovery of novel bioactive compounds from previously inaccessible genetic material
BGC Refactoring	Optimization of transcriptional control across diverse hosts [4]	AI-powered mining of metagenomic libraries for universal 5' regulatory elements with broad host ranges [4]	Facilitates heterologous expression in optimized production strains, improving yields
Clinical Translation	Accurate translation of clinical and research documents [81]	AI-powered machine translation (MT) for initial draft generation, followed by human expert review (MTPE) [81]	Dramatically increases translation speed (e.g., >200x faster) while maintaining quality and accuracy [81]
Clinical Translation	Ensuring translated text is culturally relevant and patient-friendly [81]	Human-led contextual adjustments and quality assurance checks on AI-generated translations [81]	Improves patient communication and adherence, reducing risks from miscommunication

The application of AI-generated protein editors, such as AI-designed CRISPR-Cas systems or base editors, allows for unprecedented precision in BGC refactoring. These tools can be programmed to perform multiplexed promoter swaps with high efficiency, minimizing off-target effects and streamlining the construction of high-yielding production strains [4].

For clinical translation, the synergy between AI and human expertise is critical. The Machine Translation Post-Editing (MTPE) model leverages the speed and scalability of AI for initial translation, which is then refined by human linguists to ensure terminological precision, cultural appropriateness, and compliance with regulatory standards for clinical trial documents, patient information sheets, and pharmaceutical guidelines [81]. This hybrid approach has been shown to reduce processing time by over 200% while maintaining uncompromised quality, which is paramount in drug development [81].

Experimental Protocols

Protocol: Multiplexed Promoter Engineering of a BGC Using AI-Designed Editors

This protocol details the use of AI-facilitated CRISPR tools to refactor a silent BGC by replacing its native promoters with a set of strong, orthogonal synthetic promoters.

I. Materials and Reagents

• Bacterial Artificial Chromosome (BAC): Contains the entire silent BGC to be refactored.
• AI-Designed gRNAs: A set of guide RNAs designed to target the regions upstream of each gene in the BGC operon.
• Synthetic Promoter Library: A library of orthogonal, constitutive promoters (e.g., generated via complete randomization of promoter and RBS sequences) [4].
• mCRISTAR/miCRISTAR Reagents: Includes reagents for yeast homologous recombination (YHR), Cas9 protein, and donor DNA fragments containing the synthetic promoters flanked by homology arms [4].
• Heterologous Expression Host: An optimized strain such as Streptomyces albus J1074 or Myxococcus xanthus DK1622 [4].

II. Step-by-Step Procedure

• In Silico Design:
  • Input the BGC sequence into an AI platform to identify native promoter regions and design optimal gRNAs with high on-target efficiency and minimal off-target effects.
  • Select a set of orthogonal synthetic promoters from a randomized library to ensure balanced and high-level expression of all genes in the cluster [4].

• Donor DNA Assembly:

  • Synthesize donor DNA fragments for each promoter swap. Each fragment should contain the synthetic promoter flanked by 40-50 bp homology arms corresponding to the sequences directly upstream and downstream of the native promoter to be replaced.

• Multiplexed CRISPR Editing:

  • Co-transform the BAC, donor DNA fragments, Cas9 protein, and the pool of AI-designed gRNAs into yeast cells using the mCRISTAR or miCRISTAR protocol [4].
  • The system will simultaneously catalyze the replacement of all native promoters with the synthetic ones via YHR.

• Selection and Verification:

  • Isolate the refactored BAC from yeast and transform it into the heterologous expression host.
  • Screen for successful clones via PCR and sequence verification.

• Metabolite Analysis:

  • Culture positive clones in appropriate media and analyze metabolite extracts using Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS) to detect novel or enhanced production of target natural products.

Protocol: Clinical Translation of Trial Protocols via AI-Human MTPE

This protocol ensures the accurate and efficient translation of clinical trial protocols from a source language (e.g., Japanese) into English.

I. Materials and Reagents

• Source Documents: Original clinical study protocols, presentation slides, and client comments [81].
• AI Translation Software: A state-of-the-art, commercially available AI translation tool, preferably one specialized in medical terminology.
• Bilingual Expert Linguists: Professionals with certified expertise in medical translation and the relevant language pair.

II. Step-by-Step Procedure

• Initial AI Translation:
  • Process all source documents through the AI translation tool to generate a preliminary English draft.

• Human Post-Editing (MTPE):

  • A bilingual medical linguist reviews the AI-generated text.
  • The linguist corrects inaccuracies in medical terminology (e.g., "antihypertensive" vs. "hypotensive").
  • They adjust sentence structure and phrasing to ensure clarity and readability in the target language.
  • The linguist verifies that numerical data, units, and dosages are correctly transferred.

• Contextual and Cultural Adjustment:

  • The linguist localizes the text to ensure it is culturally appropriate for the target audience and compliant with regional regulatory standards (e.g., FDA, EMA).

• Quality Assurance (QA):

  • A second linguist performs a final check to verify accuracy, consistency, and overall quality before the translated document is delivered.

Workflow and Pathway Visualizations

AI-Facilitated BGC Refactoring

AI-Human Collaborative Translation

Research Reagent Solutions

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents and Tools for AI-Driven BGC Refactoring

Reagent/Tool	Function/Benefit	Specific Example/Note
Orthogonal Synthetic Promoter Libraries	Provides a set of non-interfering, tunable promoters for balanced expression of multiple genes in a BGC [4].	Libraries generated by complete randomization of promoter and RBS sequences to ensure high orthogonality [4].
CRISPR-based Editing Tools (mCRISTAR/miCRISTAR)	Enables simultaneous replacement of multiple native promoters in a single step within yeast, greatly accelerating refactoring [4].	In vivo (mCRISTAR) or in vitro (miCRISTAR) methods for multiplexed promoter engineering of large DNA constructs [4].
Metagenomic Promoter Libraries	Offers regulatory elements with broad host ranges, facilitating BGC expression in diverse, underexplored bacterial hosts [4].	Mined from diverse phyla (Actinobacteria, Proteobacteria, etc.) and validated across multiple species [4].
Optimized Heterologous Hosts	Provides a clean genetic background and specialized metabolic machinery for high-yield production of heterologously expressed natural products [4].	Strains like Streptomyces albus J1074, Myxococcus xanthus DK1622, and Burkholderia sp. DSM7029 [4].
AI Medical Translation Platform	Rapidly generates first-draft translations of clinical and research documents, which are then refined by human experts (MTPE) for accuracy [81].	Shown to improve processing speed by >200x with a 67% reduction in editing time, without compromising quality [81].

Conclusion

The refactoring of natural product BGCs with synthetic promoters has matured into a powerful, multidisciplinary approach that is central to modern drug discovery. By integrating advanced genome editing tools like CRISETR, optimized heterologous hosts, and now AI-driven design, researchers can systematically unlock the vast repository of silent biosynthetic pathways. The successful application of these strategies, evidenced by significant yield improvements for known drugs and the discovery of novel chemical entities, underscores their transformative potential. Future progress will be driven by the continued development of more precise and efficient editors, the expansion of AI into functional prediction, and the translation of these technologies into the clinical realm, ultimately accelerating the development of new therapeutics to address pressing human health challenges.

References

• 1. A Natural Product Chemist's Guide to Unlocking Silent ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9148385/]
• 2. Cryptic or Silent? The Known Unknowns ... - PubMed Central [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7587438/]
• 3. Challenges of functional expression of complex polyketide ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0958166920301920]
• 4. biosynthetic gene clusters for heterologous production of... Refactoring [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8238852/]
• 5. Multiplexed mobilization and expression of biosynthetic ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-32858-0]
• 6. Genomic insights into biosynthetic gene cluster diversity ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-21523-3]
• 7. Synthetic Promoters: Designing the cis Regulatory Modules for Controlled Gene Expression - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29855997/]
• 8. CRISETR: an efficient technology for multiplexed refactoring of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11472037/]
• 9. Designing artificial synthetic promoters for accurate, smart ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10363483/]
• 10. Engineered CRISPR-Cas9 for Streptomyces sp. genome ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-56278-y]
• 11. A synthetic transcription platform for programmable gene expression in mammalian cells | Nature Communications [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-33287-9]
• 12. A massively parallel reporter assay library to screen short ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11604768/]
• 13. A high-throughput screening and computation platform for ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-10912-8]
• 14. The switch‐liker's guide to plant synthetic gene circuits - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11887007/]
• 15. Refactoring biosynthetic gene clusters for heterologous ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0958166920301968]
• 16. Development of a salt-enhanced promoter strategy for ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1096717625001119]
• 17. De novo promoter design method based on deep ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12392095/]
• 18. SynGenSys introduces NK.SET synthetic promoter library [https://pharmaceuticalmanufacturer.media/pharma-manufacturing-news/biopharma-news/syngensys-introduces-nk-set-synthetic-promoter-library/]
• 19. Refactoring the architecture of a polyketide gene cluster ... [https://microbialcellfactories.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12934-023-02209-9]
• 20. A community effort to optimize sequence-based deep ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41587-024-02414-w]
• 21. Natural products in drug discovery: advances and ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41573-020-00114-z]
• 22. Using natural products for drug discovery: the impact of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5563975/]
• 23. A new system can dial expression of synthetic genes up or ... [https://news.mit.edu/2025/new-system-can-dial-expression-synthetic-genes-up-down-1013]
• 24. Synthetic promoters enhance gene therapy precision [https://www.drugtargetreview.com/article/159802/synthetic-promoters-enhance-gene-therapy-precision/]
• 25. Synpromics Synthetic Promoters for Gene Control [https://www.askbio.com/gene-promoters/]
• 26. Synthetic Promoters in Gene Therapy: Design Approaches ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11640742/]
• 27. Multiplexed CRISPR/Cas9- and TAR-Mediated Promoter ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5469684/]
• 28. Multiplexed CRISPR/Cas9- and TAR-Mediated Promoter ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27197732/]
• 29. Methods and options for the heterologous production of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9896020/]
• 30. Heterologous expression [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterologous_expression]
• 31. Refactoring the Silent Spectinabilin Gene Cluster Using a ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4326240/]
• 32. Streptomyces as a versatile host platform for heterologous ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40923873/]
• 33. Development of a versatile chassis for the efficient ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-62659-0]
• 34. Engineering strategies for enhanced heterologous protein ... [https://microbialcellfactories.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12934-024-02299-z]
• 35. Mining and unearthing hidden biosynthetic potential [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-24133-5]
• 36. Synthetic Biology Advanced Natural Product Discovery [https://www.mdpi.com/2218-1989/11/11/785]
• 37. A flexible, modular and versatile functional part assembly ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10809003/]
• 38. A DNA assembly toolkit to unlock the CRISPR/Cas9 ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-023-05202-5]
• 39. Engineering modular enzyme assembly: synthetic interface ... [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/np/d5np00027k]
• 40. Promoter engineering of natural product biosynthetic gene ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38259139/]
• 41. Metagenomic mining of regulatory elements enables ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6065261/]
• 42. Engineering orthogonal dual transcription factors for multi ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms13858]
• 43. Predictive design of sigma factor-specific promoters [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19446-w]
• 44. A flexible, modular and versatile functional part assembly ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405805X23001102]
• 45. An orthogonal system for heterologous expression of ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-26620-0]
• 46. Promoter engineering of natural product biosynthetic gene ... [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2024/np/d3np00049d]
• 47. Deep flanking sequence engineering for efficient promoter ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-41899-y]
• 48. Gene-LLMs: a comprehensive survey of transformer-based ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12558637/]
• 49. Leveraging Pre-trained AI Models for Robust Promoter ... [http://www.biophysics-reports.org/en/article/doi/10.52601/bpr.2025.240033]
• 50. A CRISPR-Cas9 system for knock-out and knock-in of high ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12117839/]
• 51. Reducing the Off-target Effect of CRISPR-Cas9 Genome ... [https://www.dovepress.com/recent-advancements-in-reducing-the-off-target-effect-of-crispr-cas9-g-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-BTT]
• 52. Strategies for High-Efficiency Mutation Using the CRISPR/ ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8860194/]
• 53. Leveraging CRISPR gene editing technology to optimize ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41375-024-02444-y]
• 54. evaluating and mitigating off-target effects in CRISPR gene ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10883050/]
• 55. Atlas of nonribosomal peptide and polyketide biosynthetic ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4078802/]
• 56. A highly efficient heterologous expression platform to facilitate ... [https://microbialcellfactories.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12934-025-02722-z]
• 57. Module-Based Polyketide Synthase Engineering for de Novo ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10661043/]
• 58. Strategies for efficient production of recombinant proteins in ... [https://microbialcellfactories.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12934-022-01917-y]
• 59. Transcriptional biomarker discovery toward building a load ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10953381/]
• 60. Identifying promoters to enhance heterologous gene ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00253-025-13563-6]
• 61. Engineering wetware and software for the predictive ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-64457-0]
• 62. Genetic circuits in synthetic biology: broadening ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/synthetic-biology/articles/10.3389/fsybi.2025.1548572/full]
• 63. Development of a salt-enhanced promoter strategy for ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40716566/]
• 64. Artificially designed synthetic promoter for a high level of ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-64537-z]
• 65. Recent advances in designing synthetic plant regulatory ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2025.1567659/full]
• 66. Mechanisms of the Specificity of the CRISPR/Cas9 System ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S0026893323020139]
• 67. CRISPR GENome and epigenome engineering improves loss ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12272254/]
• 68. Methods for Optimizing CRISPR-Cas9 Genome Editing ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4976696/]
• 69. Cornerstones of CRISPR-Cas in drug development and therapy [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5459481/]
• 70. CRISPR Clinical Trials: A 2025 Update [https://innovativegenomics.org/news/crispr-clinical-trials-2025/]
• 71. CRISPR/Cas9 therapeutics: progress and prospects [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41392-023-01309-7]
• 72. Improving the Yield and Quality of Daptomycin in ... - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9058172/]
• 73. Improving the Yield and Quality of Daptomycin in ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35509317/]
• 74. In vitro strategies for the enhancement of secondary ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8857880/]
• 75. Optimization of fermentation conditions to increase the ... [https://microbialcellfactories.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12934-025-02652-w]
• 76. Enhancing microbial metabolite and enzyme production [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2014.00718/full]
• 77. Understanding Validity in Animal Models for Drug Discovery [https://www.taconic.com/resources/validated-animal-models]
• 78. Quantitative Research Designs, Hierarchy of Evidence and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12056466/]
• 79. The Significance of Validity and Reliability in Quantitative ... [https://sago.com/en/resources/blog/the-significance-of-validity-and-reliability-in-quantitative-research/]
• 80. Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in ... [https://translational-medicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12967-018-1678-1]
• 81. The Future of Medical Translation: Merging AI &… [https://wolfestonegroup.com/insights/blogs/the-future-of-medical-translation-merging-ai-human-expertise]