Boosting Carbon Capture: Progress in Enhancing RuBisCO’s Carboxylase Activity

The Calvin-Benson Cycle serves as the primary carbon-fixation pathway in nearly all photosynthetic organisms. The enzyme, Ribulose Bisphosphate Carboxylase/Oxygenase (RuBisCO), is responsible for ‘fixing’ atmospheric CO2 into Ribulose-Bisphosphate (RuBP), the most vital and rate-limiting factor in this cycle. Enhancing this enzyme carbon fixing ability is crucial for advancing global food security and addressing climate change. RuBisCO catalyses nearly all carbon fixation on Earth; however, RuBisCO is not a highly effective enzyme. The main contributing factor to its inefficiency is its oxygenase activity, which results in photorespiration instead of carbon fixation. Although many efforts have been made to enhance RuBisCO’s carbon fixing efficiency, significant advancements are still needed. In this study we examine the current understanding of RuBisCO’s catalytic mechanism, its complex oxygenase activity, evolutionary trade-offs, and new developments in RuBisCO engineering

RuBisCO, Carboxylase, Carbon Capture

1. Nelson, D.L. and Cox, M.M. (2021) Lehninger principles of biochemistry. Eighth edition. New York, NY: Macmillan International, Eighth Edition. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Prywes, N. et al. (2023) ‘Rubisco Function, Evolution, and Engineering’, Annual Review of Biochemistry, 92(1), pp. 385–410. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Taylor, T.C. and Andersson, I. (1997) ‘The structure of the complex between rubisco and its natural substrate ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate’, Journal of Molecular Biology, 265(4), pp. 432–444. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Taylor, T.C. and Andersson, I. (1996) ‘Structural transitions during activation and ligand binding in hexadecameric Rubisco inferred from the crystal structure of the activated unliganded spinach enzyme’, Nature Structural Biology, 3(1), pp. 95–101. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Valegård, K. et al. (2018) ‘Structure of Rubisco from Arabidopsis thaliana in complex with 2-carboxyarabinitol-1,5-bisphosphate’, Acta Crystallographica Section D Structural Biology, 74(1), pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Gunn, L.H., Valegård, K. and Andersson, I. (2017) ‘A unique structural domain in Methanococcoides burtonii ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase (Rubisco) acts as a small subunit mimic’, Journal of Biological Chemistry, 292(16), pp. 6838–6850. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Lin, M.T. et al. (2020) ‘Small subunits can determine enzyme kinetics of tobacco Rubisco expressed in Escherichia coli’, Nature Plants, 6(10), pp. 1289–1299. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Li, Q. et al. (2022) ‘Structural insights into cyanobacterial RuBisCO assembly coordinated by two chaperones Raf1 and RbcX’, Cell Discovery, 8(1), p. 93. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Aigner, H. et al. (2017) ‘Plant RuBisCo assembly in E. coli with five chloroplast chaperones including BSD2’, Science, 358(6368), pp. 1272–1278. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Waheeda, K. et al. (2023) ‘Molecular mechanism of Rubisco activase: Dynamic assembly and Rubisco remodeling’, Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences, 10, p. 1125922. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Tcherkez, G. (2013) ‘Modelling the reaction mechanism of ribulose‐1,5‐bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase and consequences for kinetic parameters’, Plant, Cell & Environment, 36(9), pp. 1586–1596. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Cummins, P.L., Kannappan, B. and Gready, J.E. (2018) ‘Revised mechanism of carboxylation of ribulose‐1,5‐biphosphate by rubisco from large scale quantum chemical calculations’, Journal of Computational Chemistry, 39(21), pp. 1656–1665. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Cleland, W.W. et al. (1998) ‘Mechanism of Rubisco: The Carbamate as General Base’, Chemical Reviews, 98(2), pp. 549–562. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Bathellier, C. et al. (2020) ‘Ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase activates O 2 by electron transfer’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(39), pp. 24234–24242. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Tcherkez, G.G.B., Farquhar, G.D. and Andrews, T.J. (2006) ‘Despite slow catalysis and confused substrate specificity, all ribulose bisphosphate carboxylases may be nearly perfectly optimized’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(19), pp. 7246–7251. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Shih, P.M. et al. (2016) ‘Biochemical characterization of predicted Precambrian RuBisCO’, Nature Communications, 7, p. 10382. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Flamholz, A.I. et al. (2019) ‘Revisiting Trade-offs between Rubisco Kinetic Parameters’, Biochemistry, 58(31), pp. 3365–3376. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Bouvier, J.W. et al. (2021) ‘Rubisco Adaptation Is More Limited by Phylogenetic Constraint Than by Catalytic Trade-off’, Molecular Biology and Evolution. Edited by J. Echave, 38(7), pp. 2880–2896. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Cai, Z. et al. (2014) ‘Development of an activity-directed selection system enabled significant improvement of the carboxylation efficiency of Rubisco’, Protein & Cell, 5(7), pp. 552–562. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Zhou, Y. et al. (2023) ‘Grafting Rhodobacter sphaeroides with red algae Rubisco to accelerate catalysis and plant growth’, Nature Plants, 9(6), pp. 978–986. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Lin, M.T. et al. (2022) ‘Improving the efficiency of Rubisco by resurrecting its ancestors in the family Solanaceae’, Science Advances, 8(15), p. eabm6871. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. .Meyer, M.T. et al. (2020) ‘Assembly of the algal CO 2 -fixing organelle, the pyrenoid, is guided by a Rubisco-binding motif’, Science Advances, 6(46), p. eabd2408. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Gutteridge, S. et al. (1984) ‘A site-specific mutation within the active site of ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase of Rhodospirillum rubrum’, The EMBO Journal, 3(12), pp. 2737–2743. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Andersson, I. (1996) ‘Large Structures at High Resolution: The 1.6 Å Crystal Structure of Spinach Ribulose-1,5- Bisphosphate Carboxylase/Oxygenase Complexed with 2-Carboxyarabinitol Bisphosphate’, Journal of Molecular Biology, 259(1), pp. 160–174. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Jumper, J. et al. (2021) ‘Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold’, Nature, 596(7873), pp. 583–589. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Dauparas, J. et al. (2022) ‘Robust deep learning–based protein sequence design using ProteinMPNN’, Science, 378(6615), pp. 49–56. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Watson, J.L. et al. (2023) ‘De novo design of protein structure and function with RFdiffusion’, Nature, 620(7976), pp. 1089–1100. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Yeh, A.H.-W. et al. (2023) ‘De novo design of luciferases using deep learning’, Nature, 614(7949), pp. 774–780. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Corbella, M., Pinto, G.P. and Kamerlin, S.C.L. (2023) ‘Loop dynamics and the evolution of enzyme activity’, Nature Reviews Chemistry, 7(8), pp. 536–547. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. 30. Whitney, S.M. et al. (2001) ‘Form I Rubiscos from non‐green algae are expressed abundantly but not assembled in tobacco chloroplasts’, The Plant Journal, 26(5), pp. 535–547. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Lin, M.T. and Hanson, M.R. (2018) ‘Red algal Rubisco fails to accumulate in transplastomic tobacco expressing Griffithsia monilis RbcL and RbcS genes’, Plant Direct, 2(2), p. e00045. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Gunn, L.H. et al. (2020) ‘The dependency of red Rubisco on its cognate activase for enhancing plant photosynthesis and growth’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(41), pp. 25890–25896. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Long, B.M. et al. (2016) ‘Cyanobacterial CO2-concentrating mechanism components: function and prospects for plant metabolic engineering’, Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 31, pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Zang, K. et al. (2021) ‘Scaffolding protein CcmM directs multiprotein phase separation in β-carboxysome biogenesis’, Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, 28(11), pp. 909–922. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Oltrogge, L.M. et al. (2020) ‘Multivalent interactions between CsoS2 and Rubisco mediate α-carboxysome formation’, Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, 27(3), pp. 281–287. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Ni, T. et al. (2022) ‘Structure and assembly of cargo Rubisco in two native α-carboxysomes’, Nature Communications, 13(1), p. 4299. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. He, S., Crans, V.L. and Jonikas, M.C. (2023) ‘The pyrenoid: the eukaryotic CO2-concentrating organelle’, The Plant Cell, 35(9), pp. 3236–3259. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Fei, C. et al. (2022) ‘Modelling the pyrenoid-based CO2-concentrating mechanism provides insights into its operating principles and a roadmap for its engineering into crops’, Nature Plants, 8(5), pp. 583–595. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Karthick P.V., et al. (2024) Improving Crop Yield through Increasing Carbon Gain and Reducing Carbon Loss. Plants 2024, 13(10), pp.1317-1333. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13101317 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Stainbrook, S.C., et al., (2024) C4 grasses employ distinct strategies to acclimate rubisco activase to heat stress. Bioscience Reports (2024) 44 (10): BSR20240353. doi: 10.1042/BSR20240353 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Bi, H. et al. (2017) ‘Overexpression of the rubisco activase gene improves growth and low temperature and weak light tolerance in Cucumis sativus’, Physiologia Plantarum, 161(2), pp. 224–234. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Qu, Y. et al. (2021) ‘Overexpression of both Rubisco and Rubisco activase rescues rice photosynthesis and biomass under heat stress’, Plant, Cell & Environment, 44(7), pp. 2308–2320. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Tsai, Y.-C.C. et al. (2022) ‘The CbbQO-type rubisco activases encoded in carboxysome gene clusters can activate carboxysomal form IA rubiscos’, Journal of Biological Chemistry, 298(1), p. 101476. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Zhang, Z., at al., 2024. Photorespiration in plant adaptation to environmental changes. Crop and Environment. 3 (4), pp. 203-212 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. South, P.F. et al. (2019) ‘Synthetic glycolate metabolism pathways stimulate crop growth and productivity in the field’, Science, 363(6422), p. eaat9077. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Cocon, K., D., and Lui, P. (2024) The potential of RuBisCO in CO2 capture and utilization. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science. 105, 101184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2024.101184 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Luo, S. et al. (2022) ‘A cell-free self-replenishing CO2-fixing system’, Nature Catalysis, 5(2), pp. 154–162. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Erb, T.J. et al. (2007) ‘Synthesis of C 5 -dicarboxylic acids from C 2 -units involving crotonyl-CoA carboxylase/reductase: The ethylmalonyl-CoA pathway’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(25), pp. 10631–10636. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Problem-Based Learning Strategy: Effect on Achievement of Genetics among Biology Students in Colleges of Education Oyo, Oyo State
• Gut Content Analysis of Siganus canaliculatus (Danggit)
• Predicting Human Neurotherapeutic Response through Preclinical Imaging Intelligence
• Can Algicidal Bacteria be the Solution to Successfully Manage Freshwater Algal Blooms?
• Strategies and Effective Learning in Genetics and Genomics Courses for Undergraduate Students: A Systematic Literature Review