Genome Mining and Engineering: Unlocking Nature's Hidden Pharmacy for Drug Discovery

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive overview of modern strategies in genome mining and engineering for natural product discovery, tailored for researchers and drug development professionals. It covers the foundational principles of identifying biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) in microbial genomes, explores advanced methodological tools and activation techniques like the OSMAC approach, addresses common challenges and optimization strategies in characterizing cryptic pathways, and examines validation frameworks for assessing novelty and bioactivity. By integrating the latest research and case studies, this review serves as a practical guide for leveraging genomic data to access the vast untapped reservoir of microbial natural products with therapeutic potential.

Unveiling Hidden Biosynthetic Potential: The Foundation of Genome Mining

The Paradigm Shift from Traditional Screening to Genomics-Guided Discovery

The field of natural product discovery has undergone a profound transformation, shifting from traditional bioactivity-guided screening to sophisticated genomics-guided approaches. Where researchers once relied on serendipitous discovery through chemical screening of microbial extracts, they now employ genomic blueprints to precisely identify and characterize biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) encoding specialized metabolites [1] [2]. This paradigm shift addresses fundamental limitations of traditional methods, including high rediscovery rates of known compounds and the challenge of silent gene clusters that are not expressed under laboratory conditions [1] [2]. Genome sequencing has revealed that the metabolic capabilities of traditional natural product producers were severely underestimated, with typically only a fraction of their BGCs being expressed and detected under standard fermentation conditions [1]. The development of advanced bioinformatics tools, coupled with next-generation sequencing technologies, has enabled researchers to systematically map this cryptic metabolic potential, unveiling a previously hidden treasure trove of bioactive compounds with applications in medicine, agriculture, and biotechnology [3] [2].

Computational Foundations: The Engine of Genome Mining

The exponential growth of genomic sequencing data has propelled the development of sophisticated bioinformatic tools that form the computational backbone of modern natural product discovery [3] [2]. These tools leverage our understanding of biosynthetic logic to predict natural product assembly lines and their chemical products from gene sequences.

Table 1: Key Computational Tools for Biosynthetic Gene Cluster Analysis

Tool Name	Primary Function	Application
antiSMASH	BGC identification and classification	Comprehensive analysis of various BGC classes [3] [4]
ClusterFinder	Identifies novel BGCs based on HMM patterns	Discovery of atypical BGCs [3]
PRISM	Predicts chemical structures of RiPPs and other compounds	Structural prediction of ribosomal natural products [5]
GNPS	Mass spectrometry data analysis and molecular networking	Connecting genomic and metabolomic data [3]
NRPSPredictor	Substrate specificity prediction for NRPS enzymes	Predicting amino acid incorporation in NRPS assembly lines [3]
GATOR-GC	Targeted BGC discovery and syntenic analysis	Flexible framework for identifying specific BGC families [4]

These computational strategies can be broadly categorized into untargeted and targeted approaches [4]. Untargeted mining, exemplified by tools like antiSMASH, aims to reveal the complete biosynthetic potential of an organism by identifying all BGCs present in a genome [4]. In contrast, targeted mining focuses on identifying specific BGCs of interest, often using known biosynthetic elements as "search terms" to find structurally related molecules [4]. This targeted approach is particularly valuable for investigating specific natural product families where conserved biosynthetic pathways can guide the discovery of novel analogs.

Sequencing Technologies: Enabling the Genomic Revolution

Advancements in nucleotide sequencing technologies have been instrumental in enabling the genomics-guided discovery paradigm. The transition from first-generation Sanger sequencing to next-generation short-read platforms (e.g., Illumina) and more recently to third-generation long-read technologies (e.g., Pacific Biosciences and Oxford Nanopore) has dramatically improved our ability to access complete BGCs [6].

Long-read sequencing technologies are particularly transformative for natural product discovery because BGCs are often large (10 to >100 kb) and contain repetitive regions with high GC content, making them difficult to assemble accurately from short reads alone [5] [6]. The development of low-cost long-read sequencing options, such as Oxford Nanopore's Flongle platform, has made contiguous genome assemblies accessible even for smaller laboratories, facilitating the analysis of BGCs from actinomycetes and other natural product-rich microbes [5]. Recent studies have demonstrated that contiguous DNA assemblies suitable for BGC analysis can be obtained through low-coverage, multiplexed sequencing, significantly reducing costs while maintaining data quality sufficient for BGC detection and analysis [5].

Strategic Approaches to Genomics-Guided Discovery

Targeted Genome Mining for Specific Compound Classes

Targeted genome mining focuses on identifying specific BGCs of interest across genomes, which is particularly useful for investigating known natural product families [4]. This approach leverages conserved biosynthetic pathways to guide the discovery of structurally related molecules. For example, the FK family of immunosuppressive compounds (including rapamycin and FK506) has been successfully explored through targeted mining using the lysine cyclodeaminase (KCDA) enzyme as a biosynthetic "search term" to query Actinomycete sequence databases [4]. This strategy has led to the identification of novel FK analogs with potentially improved pharmacological properties.

The manual process for targeted mining involves: (1) selecting a query protein from a known BGC, (2) searching for homologous sequences in genomic databases, (3) analyzing the genomic context of significant hits, and (4) determining whether these represent putative BGCs for the target compound class [4]. This process can be automated using tools like GATOR-GC (Genomic Assessment Tool for Orthologous Regions and Gene Clusters), which provides a flexible framework for identifying gene clusters based on customizable search criteria incorporating both required and optional biosynthetic proteins [4].

Resistance Gene-Guided Discovery

Another powerful strategy for targeted discovery involves mining microbial genomes for resistance genes that often co-localize with BGCs [2]. This approach is particularly valuable for discovering new antibiotics, as bacteria typically encode mechanisms to avoid self-toxicity from their own antibiotic products. These resistance mechanisms include antibiotic-modifying enzymes, target bypass systems, and efflux pumps [2].

By scanning genomes for known resistance genes associated with BGCs, researchers can prioritize orphan gene clusters for experimental investigation. This strategy has led to the discovery of thiolactomycin, a fatty acid synthase inhibitor whose biosynthesis remained elusive for decades until resistance-based mining revealed its BGC in Salinispora strains [2]. Similarly, the identification of pyxidicyclins from myxobacteria was guided by the presence of genes encoding pentapeptide repeat proteins that confer resistance to topoisomerase inhibitors [2].

Figure 1: Resistance gene-guided mining workflow for antibiotic discovery

Integrating Metabolomics with Genomics

A crucial advancement in genomics-guided discovery has been the integration of mass spectrometry-based metabolomics with genomic data [2]. This combined approach helps bridge the gap between predicted BGCs and their corresponding chemical products. By analyzing the metabolomic profiles of producing strains and correlating spectral features with genomic predictions, researchers can rapidly identify the compounds encoded by specific BGCs.

Molecular networking based on tandem mass spectrometry data has proven particularly valuable for this integration [2]. This technique visualizes the chemical space of a sample as networks of related molecules, allowing researchers to identify novel compounds that are structurally related to known metabolites. When combined with genomic information, molecular networking enables the connection of BGCs to their metabolic products, facilitating the prioritization of novel compounds for isolation and characterization [2].

Experimental Protocols: From BGC Prediction to Compound Characterization

Protocol: Targeted Genome Mining for FK506-family Compounds

Principle: This protocol uses a characterized biosynthetic enzyme as a query to identify novel members of the FK506 family through genomic context analysis [4].

Materials:

• Genomic databases (e.g., NCBI, IMG-ABC)
• BLASTP software
• Genome browser with BGC visualization capability
• Optional: GATOR-GC software for automated analysis

Procedure:

• Query Selection: Select a key biosynthetic enzyme from the FK506 pathway (e.g., lysine cyclodeaminase/KCDA or chorismatase) as query sequence [4].
• Database Search: Perform BLASTP search against selected genomic databases using default parameters with an E-value cutoff of 1e-10.
• Hit Analysis: Collect significant hits (E-value < 1e-20) and extract their genomic contexts (±50-100 kb).
• BGC Assessment: Examine genomic contexts for presence of additional FK506 biosynthetic genes (PKS modules, regulatory genes, additional tailoring enzymes).
• Cluster Delineation: Define BGC boundaries based on gene synteny and functional assignments.
• Heterologous Expression: Clone confirmed novel BGCs into suitable expression hosts (e.g., Streptomyces species) for compound production.

Expected Results: Identification of 5-15 putative FK-family BGCs per 1000 genomes searched, with varying degrees of novelty compared to known FK506/FK520 clusters [4].

Protocol: Low-Cost Long-Read Sequencing for BGC Discovery

Principle: This protocol enables complete BGC assembly using Oxford Nanopore Flongle sequencing at reduced cost through sample multiplexing [5].

Materials:

• Oxford Nanopore Flongle flow cell and sequencing kit
• DNA extraction kit for high-molecular-weight DNA
• Barcoding kit for multiplexing
• Computational resources for genome assembly (e.g., Flye, Canu)
• BGC prediction software (e.g., antiSMASH)

Procedure:

• DNA Extraction: Isolate high-molecular-weight genomic DNA from actinomycete strains of interest.
• Library Preparation: Prepare sequencing library using native barcoding kit to multiplex 3-4 samples per Flongle flow cell.
• Sequencing: Run Flongle sequencing for 24-48 hours to achieve ~10-20× coverage per genome.
• Genome Assembly: Assemble reads using long-read assembler (e.g., Flye) with default parameters.
• BGC Prediction: Run antiSMASH on assembled contigs to identify complete BGCs.
• Metabolite Correlation: Correlate predicted BGCs with LC-MS metabolomic data from the same strains.

Expected Results: Contiguous assemblies with N50 > 3 Mb, enabling identification of 20-40 BGCs per actinomycete genome at a cost of $30-40 per strain [5].

Table 2: Research Reagent Solutions for Genomics-Guided Natural Product Discovery

Reagent/Material	Function	Example Applications
Oxford Nanopore Flongle	Low-cost long-read sequencing	Multiplexed genome sequencing for BGC discovery [5]
antiSMASH Software	BGC identification and classification	Comprehensive genome mining for all major BGC classes [3] [4]
GATOR-GC Software	Targeted BGC discovery	Identification of specific BGC families using custom protein queries [4]
Heterologous Expression Hosts	BGC expression in amenable backgrounds	Production of compounds from silent or cryptic BGCs [2]
Molecular Networking Platforms	MS-based metabolomic correlation	Connecting BGCs to their metabolic products [2]

Case Studies: Success Stories in Genomics-Guided Discovery

Siphonazole Discovery Through Integrated Genomics and Metabolomics

The antiplasmodial natural product siphonazole was isolated from a Herpetosiphon species nearly a decade before its biosynthetic origin was understood [2]. Through a combination of genome mining, imaging mass spectrometry, and expression studies in the native producer, researchers eventually identified the BGC as a mixed PKS/NRPS pathway [2]. This case highlights the power of integrated approaches to connect known compounds with their genetic basis, enabling future engineering of analogs and yield improvement.

Syn-BNPs: Bioinformatics-Driven Discovery and Synthesis

When BGCs remain silent or the producing organisms are uncultivable, synthetic-bioinformatic natural products (syn-BNPs) offer an alternative discovery route [2]. This approach involves bioinformatic prediction of chemical structures from BGC sequences followed by chemical synthesis of the predicted compounds. Notable successes include:

• Humimycin (1): An anti-MRSA peptide discovered through prediction and synthesis [2]
• Paenimucillin A (2): A novel antibiotic identified through similar methodology [2]
• Pyritides (e.g., 3): A new class of RiPPs predicted to undergo formal [4+2] cycloaddition, confirmed through chemical synthesis and enzymatic reconstitution [2]

Figure 2: syn-BNP workflow for bioinformatics-driven discovery

The paradigm shift from traditional screening to genomics-guided discovery has fundamentally transformed natural product research, enabling a more systematic and comprehensive exploration of Nature's chemical diversity. By leveraging BGCs as genetic signatures for natural products, researchers can now prioritize discovery efforts based on genomic information, significantly reducing rediscovery rates and focusing resources on the most promising leads [3] [2].

Future advancements in this field will likely come from several directions. Machine learning algorithms are showing improved ability to identify novel BGC classes beyond those recognizable by current homology-based tools [2]. The integration of multiple omics datasets (genomics, transcriptomics, metabolomics) will provide deeper insights into the regulation of secondary metabolism and enable more effective activation of silent gene clusters [2]. As single-cell sequencing technologies mature, we will gain access to the vast metabolic potential of uncultured microorganisms, potentially revealing entirely new classes of natural products [3].

The continued development of synthetic biology tools for BGC refactoring and heterologous expression will be crucial for converting genomic predictions into isolable compounds, particularly for cryptic clusters and those from difficult-to-culture organisms [3]. Together, these advancements promise to further accelerate natural product discovery, ensuring that these invaluable compounds continue to provide novel scaffolds for drug development and other applications in the decades to come.

Biosynthetic Gene Clusters (BGCs) are groups of co-located genes that cooperate to build specialized chemical compounds known as secondary metabolites [7]. Unlike primary metabolic pathways essential for survival, secondary metabolites often provide producing organisms with competitive advantages through antimicrobial, antifungal, or signaling properties [7] [8]. These diverse molecules have served as the foundation for countless therapeutics, including antibiotics, anticancer agents, and immunosuppressants [9].

The emerging paradigm in natural product discovery has shifted from traditional bioactivity-guided isolation to genome mining approaches that leverage the genetic blueprints encoded in BGCs [10] [2]. This transition began in earnest when early bacterial genome sequencing revealed that the majority of microbial natural products remained undiscovered, with most BGCs being "silent" or "cryptic" under standard laboratory conditions [10] [2]. Today, with genetic information available for hundreds of thousands of organisms, researchers have unprecedented opportunities to survey nature's chemical diversity through its genetic encodings [10] [11].

Table: Major Classes of Natural Products Encoded by BGCs

BGC Class	Key Enzymes	Representative Natural Products	Biological Activities
Non-Ribosomal Peptide Synthetases (NRPS)	NRPS assembly lines	Penicillin, Vancomycin	Antibacterial [12]
Polyketide Synthases (PKS)	PKS modules	Tetracycline, Erythromycin	Antibacterial, Antifungal [12]
Ribosomally Synthesized and Post-translationally Modified Peptides (RiPPs)	Modification enzymes	Nisin, Microcin	Antimicrobial [2]
Terpenes	Terpene synthases, Cyclases	Taxol, Artemisinin	Anticancer, Antimalarial [2]
Hybrid Clusters	Multiple backbone enzymes	Siphonazole	Antiplasmodial [2]

Genome Mining Strategies and Computational Tools

Bioinformatics Platforms for BGC Detection

The exponential growth of genomic sequencing data has propelled the development of sophisticated bioinformatic tools for BGC identification and analysis [13] [2]. antiSMASH (antibiotics and Secondary Metabolite Analysis Shell) stands as the most widely used platform for automated detection of BGCs in genomic data [14] [13] [12]. This tool and others like PRISM and ClustScan rely on predefined rules and homology to characterized pathways to effectively detect known gene cluster types [13].

The conventional workflow begins with genome sequencing and assembly, followed by gene prediction and annotation, then BGC detection using tools like antiSMASH [14] [8]. Subsequent analysis involves comparing identified BGCs against databases such as MIBiG (Minimum Information about a Biosynthetic Gene Cluster) to assess novelty [8]. The resulting BGCs can be grouped into Gene Cluster Families (GCFs) using tools like BiG-SCAPE to understand their evolutionary relationships and distribution across taxa [13] [8] [12].

Orthogonal Genome Mining Strategies

Beyond conventional homology-based approaches, researchers have developed several orthogonal genome mining strategies that target specific chemical features or biological properties [10] [11]. These "biosynthetic hooks" allow for querying BGCs with a high probability of encoding previously undiscovered, bioactive compounds [10].

Bioactive feature targeting focuses on enzymes responsible for installing reactive chemical moieties known to confer bioactivity, such as β-lactones, enediynes, and epoxyketones [10]. For instance, mining genomes for the conserved enediyne PKS genes led to the discovery of tiancimycin A, a highly cytotoxic compound with potential as an antibody-drug conjugate [10].

Resistance-based mining exploits the fact that bacteria often harbor resistance genes adjacent to antibiotic BGCs to avoid self-toxicity [2]. By scanning for known resistance mechanisms, researchers can prioritize clusters likely to encode compounds with specific mechanisms of action [2]. This approach successfully identified the thiotetronic acid natural product thiolactomycin and the novel compound pyxidicyclin A [2].

Target-based mining strategically searches for BGCs predicted to encode inhibitors of specific therapeutic targets. One innovative example involved scanning fungal genomes for dihydroxyacid dehydratase (DHAD) resistance genes colocalized with biosynthetic enzymes, leading to the discovery of aspterric acid, a potent herbicide [2].

Experimental Protocols for BGC Characterization

BGC Activation and Heterologous Expression

Many BGCs remain silent under laboratory conditions, necessitating strategies for their activation [2]. The following protocol outlines a standard approach for BGC activation in Streptomyces species, which are prolific producers of secondary metabolites [14].

Protocol: Genetic Manipulation of BGCs in Streptomyces

• Materials:

  • Donor E. coli ET12567/pUZ8002
  • Receptor Streptomyces spores
  • Non-antibiotic selection markers (e.g., apramycin, thiostrepton)
  • Conjugation media (SFM, MS, etc.)
  • Antibiotics for selection
  • Plasmid vectors with origin of transfer (oriT)

• Method:

  • Preparation of donor E. coli cells: Introduce the plasmid containing the target BGC or activation system into the donor E. coli strain. Grow cultures to mid-log phase and wash to remove antibiotics [14].
  • Preparation of receptor Streptomyces spores: Harvest spores from mature Streptomyces cultures and heat-shock to germinate [14].
  • Intergeneric conjugation: Mix donor and receptor cells in appropriate ratios and plate on conjugation media. Incubate for 9-24 hours at 30°C [14].
  • Overlay with selective antibiotics: After conjugation, overlay plates with antibiotics selective for exconjugants and with nalidixic acid to counter-select against the donor E. coli [14].
  • Screening for exconjugants: Incubate plates until exconjugants appear (typically 3-7 days) [14].

• Expected Results: Successful conjugation yields Streptomyces exconjugants harboring the introduced DNA. These can be screened for metabolite production through analytical methods such as LC-MS [14].

Advanced Refactoring Using Golden Gate Assembly

Recent advances in synthetic biology have enabled more sophisticated BGC refactoring approaches. The following protocol describes a high-efficiency method using Golden Gate Assembly (GGA) for BGC construction and diversification [9].

Protocol: Golden Gate Assembly for BGC Refactoring

• Materials:

  • BGC parts (promoters, genes, terminators) with appropriate overhangs
  • Golden Gate Assembly enzymes (Type IIS restriction enzymes, ligase)
  • Streptomyces expression vectors
  • E. coli cloning strains
  • Streptomyces heterologous hosts (e.g., S. coelicolor M1152)

• Method:

  • BGC design and part acquisition: Design the refactored cluster with standardized parts. Obtain individual genetic elements via synthesis or PCR amplification [9].
  • Hierarchical assembly: Assemble smaller parts into transcriptional units using Golden Gate reactions. Combine these units into larger fragments and eventually the complete BGC in a destination vector [9].
  • Pathway engineering: Introduce specific modifications such as promoter swaps, gene deletions, or tagging simultaneously through the assembly process [9].
  • Heterologous expression: Introduce the assembled BGC into optimized heterologous hosts via conjugation or transformation [9].
  • Metabolite analysis: Analyze culture extracts using LC-MS and molecular networking (e.g., GNPS) to identify pathway products and intermediates [9].

• Expected Results: This approach enabled construction of the 23 kb actinorhodin BGC and 23 mutant derivatives with 100% efficiency, revealing nine essential genes and significant pathway rewiring upon inactivation of non-essential genes [9].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table: Essential Research Reagents for BGC Discovery and Characterization

Reagent/Tool	Function	Application Examples
antiSMASH	Automated detection and annotation of BGCs in genomic data	Initial BGC identification in bacterial and fungal genomes [14] [13]
MIBiG Database	Repository of known BGCs for comparative analysis	Dereplication and identification of novel BGCs [13] [8]
BiG-SCAPE	BGC sequence similarity networking and GCF analysis	Evolutionary studies and BGC prioritization [13] [12]
Golden Gate Assembly	High-efficiency, modular DNA assembly system	BGC refactoring and pathway engineering [9]
GNPS Platform	Mass spectrometry-based molecular networking	Metabolite dereplication and pathway mapping [9]
Heterologous Hosts	Optimized chassis for BGC expression	Activation of silent clusters from uncultivable organisms [2] [9]
Embramine	Embramine, CAS:3565-72-8, MF:C18H22BrNO, MW:348.3 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
3-Acetylamino-adamantane-1-carboxylic acid	3-Acetylamino-adamantane-1-carboxylic acid, CAS:6240-00-2, MF:C13H19NO3, MW:237.29 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

Case Studies and Applications

Large-Scale Fungal BGC Mining

A comprehensive analysis of 187 fungal genomes from Alternaria and related genera identified 6,323 BGCs, averaging 34 per genome [8]. This large-scale study revealed that:

• BGC distribution patterns generally correlated with phylogeny at higher taxonomic levels [8]
• The biosynthetic potential for specific mycotoxins like alternariol was restricted to particular taxonomic sections [8]
• The divergent Alternaria sections Infectoriae and Pseudoalternaria possessed highly unique GCF profiles compared to other sections [8]

This research demonstrates how genome mining can inform food safety practices and disease management by identifying which taxonomic groups pose the greatest risk for producing harmful metabolites [8].

Marine Bacterial BGC Diversity

An analysis of 199 marine bacterial genomes screened with antiSMASH 7.0 revealed 29 different BGC types, with NRPS, betalactone, and NRPS-independent siderophores being most predominant [12]. The study specifically investigated vibrioferrin-producing BGCs, finding that:

• Core biosynthetic genes remained highly conserved across taxa [12]
• Accessory genes exhibited high genetic variability, potentially influencing iron-chelation properties [12]
• Clustering analysis showed vibrioferrin BGCs formed 12 families at 10% similarity but merged into a single GCF at 30% similarity [12]

These findings highlight the biosynthetic diversity of marine bacteria and the structural plasticity of specific BGCs, which may influence microbial interactions in iron-limited marine environments [12].

Table: Distribution of Major BGC Types Across Taxonomic Groups

Organism Group	Total Genomes Surveyed	Average BGCs per Genome	Most Abundant BGC Classes
Alternaria Fungi	123	29	PKS, NRPS, Terpenes [8]
Marine Bacteria	199	Variable by species	NRPS, Betalactone, NI-siderophore [12]
Human Gut Bacteria	Thousands	Not specified	RiPPs, NRPS, PKS [7]

The field of BGC research is rapidly evolving with several emerging trends shaping its future. Artificial intelligence and machine learning are increasingly being applied to overcome limitations of rule-based algorithms, enabling identification of novel BGC classes beyond known architectures [13] [2] [15]. Deep learning models show particular promise for predicting BGC boundaries and encoded structures from sequence data alone [13].

Integration of multi-omics data represents another frontier, with researchers combining genomic, transcriptomic, and metabolomic data to better prioritize BGCs for experimental characterization [2]. Mass spectrometry-based molecular networking paired with genomic analysis has proven powerful for linking BGCs to their metabolic products [2] [9].

The continued development of synthetic biology tools for BGC refactoring, such as the Golden Gate Assembly platform, is making large-scale BGC construction and diversification increasingly efficient and accessible [9]. These technologies enable systematic dissection of BGC function and optimization of natural product production [9].

As these methodologies mature, decoding BGCs will continue to reveal nature's blueprints for natural products, accelerating the discovery of novel therapeutics and expanding our understanding of microbial chemical ecology. The integration of computational prediction with experimental validation represents the most promising path forward for unlocking the vast potential encoded in biosynthetic gene clusters.

The growing number of sequenced microbial genomes has revealed a remarkable disparity between biosynthetic potential and discovered natural products. Cryptic or orphan biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs)—DNA sequences encoding the production of specialized metabolites that are either not expressed under laboratory conditions or for which the encoded product remains unknown—represent a vast untapped resource for drug discovery and biochemical innovation [16] [17]. In model organisms like Streptomyces coelicolor, genome sequencing uncovered 18 natural product BGCs for which the products had yet to be discovered, despite decades of study [16]. This revelation spawned the field of genome mining, which takes a genome-first approach to natural product discovery [16] [10].

The silent majority of BGCs presents both a challenge and opportunity. Studies indicate that a single bacterial genome may contain dozens of BGCs, with the vast majority remaining silent under standard laboratory conditions [17]. For example, a global analysis of 1,154 diverse bacterial genomes identified over 33,000 putative BGCs, most of which are uncharacterized [16]. This review provides experimental frameworks and methodological guides for activating and characterizing these silent genetic reservoirs, with particular emphasis on their application within natural product discovery pipelines.

Experimental Protocols for Awakening Silent Gene Clusters

Cultural Manipulation: The OSMAC Approach

The One Strain Many Compounds (OSMAC) approach utilizes systematic variation of cultivation parameters to activate silent BGCs. This method relies on the premise that altering physiological conditions can mimic the environmental cues that trigger natural product biosynthesis in native habitats [17].

Protocol:

• Inoculum Preparation: Grow seed culture of the target microbe in standard medium for 48 hours.
• Media Variation: Inoculate the strain into at least 10 different media with varying carbon sources (e.g., glucose, glycerol, cellulose), nitrogen sources (e.g., peptone, nitrate, ammonium), and trace element compositions.
• Culture Condition Manipulation: For each medium, test different culture vessels (flasks, plates), aeration rates (100-250 rpm), and temperatures (15-37°C).
• Chemical Elicitors: Add enzyme inhibitors, heavy metals, or subinhibitory concentrations of antibiotics to select cultures.
• Metabolite Monitoring: Extract cultures at 3, 5, 7, and 14 days using organic solvents (e.g., ethyl acetate, butanol) and analyze by LC-MS.
• Dereplication: Compare chromatographic profiles across conditions to identify uniquely produced metabolites under specific conditions.

Limitations: The OSMAC approach can be laborious with no guarantee of activating all silent clusters, but it remains valuable for initial screening due to its technical simplicity and minimal requirement for genetic manipulation [17].

Ribosome Engineering for Transcriptional Derepression

Ribosome engineering exploits mutations in translational and transcriptional machinery to globally activate silent BGCs by altering bacterial stringent response and physiological states [17].

Protocol:

• Mutant Selection: Spread late-exponential phase culture onto agar plates containing sublethal concentrations of antibiotics (e.g., streptomycin 5-10 μg/mL for ribosomal protein S12 mutants or rifampicin 5-10 μg/mL for RNA polymerase mutants).
• Incubation: Incubate plates at optimal growth temperature until resistant colonies appear (typically 5-10 days).
• Screening: Transfer individual colonies to 96-well plates with liquid medium and screen for metabolite production changes via LC-MS after 5-7 days.
• Mutant Verification: Sequence rpsL (ribosomal protein S12) or rpoB (RNA polymerase β-subunit) genes to confirm mutations.
• Fermentation Optimization: Scale up promising mutants for larger-scale metabolite production.

Mechanistic Basis: Mutations at Lys-88 in ribosomal protein S12 enhance protein synthesis in stationary phase, while mutations at His-437 in the RNAP β-subunit increase promoter binding affinity, leading to enhanced expression of secondary metabolite pathways [17].

Co-cultivation for Inter-Species Crosstalk

Mimicking natural microbial communities through co-culture can activate silent BGCs via inter-species signaling [17].

Protocol:

• Partner Selection: Select partner strains from different taxonomic groups (e.g., actinomycetes with fungi).
• Cultivation Methods:
  • Direct Contact: Streak or spot strains adjacent to each other on solid media (0.5-2 cm distance).
  • Separated Culture: Use divided plates or dialysis membranes to allow metabolite exchange while preventing physical contact.
• Incubation: Co-culture for 7-21 days under standard conditions.
• Monitoring: Monitor interaction zone for morphological changes or pigmentation differences.
• Extraction and Analysis: Extract entire agar plugs containing both organisms and interaction zones, with parallel monoculture controls.

Key Finding: In one documented case, physical contact between Aspergillus nidulans and Streptomyces rapamycinicus was required to induce production of the aromatic polyketides orsellinic acid and F-9775A/F-9775B [17].

Epigenetic Modulation in Fungal Systems

For fungal strains, epigenetic modifiers can activate silent BGCs by altering chromatin structure and accessibility [17].

Protocol:

• Inhibitor Preparation: Prepare stock solutions of DNA methyltransferase (DNMT) inhibitors (5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine) or histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors (suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid) in DMSO.
• Treatment: Add inhibitors to liquid medium at subinhibitory concentrations (typically 1-100 μM) after 24-48 hours of growth.
• Control Cultures: Include DMSO-only controls to account for solvent effects.
• Extended Cultivation: Extend cultivation period by 3-7 days beyond normal stationary phase.
• Metabolite Analysis: Monitor for newly produced metabolites throughout treatment period.

Genetic Approach: For genetically tractable fungi, delete genes encoding histone-modifying enzymes (hdaA for histone deacetylase, cclA for COMPASS complex) to achieve permanent chromatin remodeling [17].

Targeted Discovery of Bioactive Natural Products

Bioactive Feature Targeting

Many natural products contain reactive chemical features directly responsible for bioactivity. Targeting the biosynthetic enzymes that install these features enables focused discovery of bioactive compounds [10].

Table 1: Reactive Chemical Features and Their Biosynthetic Enzymes for Genome Mining

Reactive Feature	Biosynthetic Enzyme	Genome Mining Hook	Example Natural Product
Enediyne	Polyketide Synthase (PKS)	Conserved enediyne PKS genes	Tiancimycin A [10]
β-Lactone	β-Lactone synthetase	ATP-grasp superfamily enzymes	Ebelactone [10]
Epoxyketone	Flavin-dependent decarboxylase-dehydrogenase-monooxygenase	Trio of interacting enzymes	Epoxomicin [10]
Isothiocyanate	Isonitrile synthase	LuxE family homologs	--
Disulfide	FAD-dependent dithiol oxidase	Disulfide bond-forming enzymes	Holomycin [10]

Protocol for Enediyne Discovery:

• Probe Design: Design PCR primers targeting conserved enediyne PKS genes.
• Strain Screening: Screen strain collections using real-time PCR with TaqMan chemistry.
• Phylogenetic Analysis: Sequence positive amplicons and construct phylogenetic tree.
• Whole Genome Sequencing: Select phylogenetically distinct strains for WGS.
• Gene Neighborhood Analysis: Identify BGC boundaries and predict novel features.
• Heterologous Expression: Clone entire BGC into suitable expression host.
• Product Isolation: Isplicate compounds and test for DNA cleavage activity and cytotoxicity [10].

The Genomisotopic Approach

The genomisotopic approach combines genomic analysis with stable isotope labeling to identify compounds encoded by orphan BGCs [17] [18].

Protocol:

• Precursor Prediction: Analyze adenylation domain specificities in nonribosomal peptide synthetase (NRPS) clusters to predict amino acid building blocks.
• Isotope Feeding: Feed (^{13})C- or (^{15})N-labeled predicted precursors to growing culture.
• Metabolite Extraction: Extract culture with organic solvents at multiple time points.
• Isotope-Guided Fractionation: Fractionate extracts and monitor for isotope-enriched masses by LC-MS.
• Structure Elucidation: Use NMR and MS/MS to determine complete structure of labeled compounds.
• Genetic Verification: Knock out core biosynthetic gene to link cluster to compound [18].

Application Example: Application to Pseudomonas fluorescens Pf-5 led to discovery of orfamide A, founder of a group of bioactive cyclic lipopeptides [18].

Automated Detection of Metallophore BGCs

Specialized algorithms can now automatically detect specific natural product classes, such as non-ribosomal peptide (NRP) metallophores, which are crucial for microbial metal acquisition [19].

Protocol:

• Genome Analysis: Run antiSMASH 7.0+ on target genomes with NRP metallophore detection enabled.
• Chelator Identification: Screen for eight key chelator substructures: 2,3-dihydroxybenzoate (catechol), hydroxamates, salicylate, β-hydroxyaspartate, β-hydroxyhistidine, graminine, Dmaq, and pyoverdine chromophore.
• Pathway Validation: Confirm presence of complete biosynthetic pathways (e.g., entC and entA for 2,3-DHB biosynthesis).
• Taxonomic Distribution: Analyze phylogenetic distribution of BGCs across bacterial lineages.
• Heterologous Expression: Express representative clusters in heterologous hosts.
• Metallophore Characterization: Purify compounds and validate metal chelation properties [19].

Performance Metrics: This automated approach detects chelator biosynthesis genes with 97% precision and 78% recall against manual curation [19].

Pathway Elucidation and Compound Identification

Regulatory Element Phylogenetics

Understanding regulatory mechanisms enables targeted activation of silent BGCs through manipulation of transcriptional controls [20].

Protocol for Regulatory Element Analysis:

• Domain Identification: Use HMMER with Pfam HMMs to detect regulatory protein domains (HisKA, HATPase_c) in BGCs.
• System Classification: Classify regulatory systems as one-component (transcription factors with sensing domains) or two-component systems (histidine kinase-response regulator pairs).
• Phylogenetic Reconstruction: Build maximum likelihood trees of regulatory elements from reference databases (MIBiG) and environmental strains.
• Activator Prediction: Identify known inducers of phylogenetically related BGCs as candidate activators for silent clusters.
• Cross-Activation Testing: Apply predicted activators to environmental strains and monitor BGC expression via RT-PCR [20].

Heterologous Expression Strategies

Heterologous expression allows for direct linkage of BGCs to their encoded metabolites in tractable host systems [17].

Protocol:

• Cluster Selection: Prioritize BGCs based on bioinformatic predictions of novelty.
• Host Selection: Choose well-characterized hosts (Streptomyces coelicolor, Aspergillus nidulans) with minimal secondary metabolite background.
• Cluster Capture: Use transformation-associated recombination (TAR) or cosmic/BAC cloning to capture large BGC regions.
• Vector Engineering: Employ shuttle vectors with appropriate replication origins and selection markers.
• Promoter Engineering: Replace native promoters with inducible systems when necessary.
• Cluster Expression: Introduce constructs into expression host and screen for metabolite production under multiple conditions.
• Pathway Elucidation: Combine gene knockouts with metabolic profiling to establish biosynthetic pathway [17].

Case Study: The entire citrinin biosynthetic gene cluster from Monascus purpureus was successfully expressed in Aspergillus oryzae by co-expressing the pathway-specific activator ctnA [17].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 2: Key Research Reagents for Cryptic Gene Cluster Exploration

Reagent/Category	Function	Examples/Specifications
antiSMASH	BGC prediction and classification	Version 7.0+ with NRP metallophore detection; detects >50 BGC types [19] [10]
MIBiG Database	BGC reference repository	Curated database of experimentally characterized BGCs; enables comparative genomics [16] [20]
Histone Modifiers	Epigenetic regulation	HDAC inhibitors (suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid); DNMT inhibitors (5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine) [17]
Ribosome Engineering Agents	Mutant selection	Streptomycin (5-10 μg/mL); Rifampicin (5-10 μg/mL) [17]
Stable Isotopes	Metabolic labeling	(^{13})C-labeled amino acids; (^{15})N-labeled precursors [17] [18]
Heterologous Hosts	BGC expression	Streptomyces coelicolor M1152; Aspergillus nidulans A1145 [17]
GeneSetCluster 2.0	GSA interpretation	R package with Unique Gene-Sets approach; reduces redundancy in enrichment results [21]
Matlystatin E	Matlystatin E, CAS:140638-26-2, MF:C26H42N6O6, MW:534.6 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
AC-Leu-val-lys-aldehyde	AC-Leu-val-lys-aldehyde, MF:C19H36N4O4, MW:384.5 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

Workflow and Pathway Diagrams

Integrated Workflow for Cryptic Gene Cluster Exploration

Silent Gene Cluster Exploration Workflow

Regulatory Mechanism Activation Pathway

Regulatory Activation of Silent BGCs

The exploration of cryptic and orphan gene clusters represents a frontier in natural product discovery, fueled by increasingly sophisticated genomic and experimental approaches. By integrating bioinformatic predictions with the systematic activation and linking strategies outlined in this review, researchers can access the vast chemical diversity encoded in microbial genomes. As these methodologies continue to evolve, particularly through automated detection algorithms and refined heterologous expression systems, the silent majority of BGCs will increasingly contribute to the discovery of novel bioactive compounds with applications in medicine, agriculture, and biotechnology. The experimental frameworks provided here offer practical pathways for researchers to unlock this hidden potential and translate genetic information into chemical discovery.

The exploration of natural products has undergone a fundamental shift from traditional bioactivity-guided isolation to sophisticated genome mining approaches that leverage evolutionary relationships [10]. With genetic information now available for hundreds of thousands of organisms, researchers can meticulously survey the diversity of biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) - nature's toolkit for producing bioactive compounds [10]. Phylogenetic methods have become increasingly important in natural product research, enabling scientists to infer the evolutionary history of secondary metabolite gene clusters and their encoded compounds [22]. The growing amount of genetic data allows us to understand patterns and mechanisms of how nature's enormous chemical diversity has evolved, using phylogenetic inference to facilitate functional predictions of biosynthetic enzymes [22].

This paradigm shift began in earnest in the early 2000s when the first Streptomyces bacterial genomes were sequenced, revealing that the vast majority of small molecules produced by microbes had yet to be discovered [10]. Where researchers once faced challenges of dereplication and frequent re-isolation of known compounds, they can now exploit genetic signatures of enzymes to identify new biosynthetic pathways through phylogeny-based classification [10]. This approach has proven particularly valuable for discovering bioactive natural products with pharmacological potential, as evolutionary relationships often preserve key functional elements while allowing structural diversification.

Table 1: Core Concepts in Phylogeny-Guided Natural Product Discovery

Concept	Description	Application in Discovery
Biosynthetic Gene Clusters (BGCs)	Groups of co-localized genes encoding biosynthetic pathways for natural products	Target for genomic mining and evolutionary analysis
Evolutionary Conservation	Preservation of genetic elements across related taxa	Identifies functionally important regions in BGCs
Homologous Sequences	Genes sharing common evolutionary origin	Enables phylogenetic reconstruction and functional prediction
Sequence Divergence	Accumulated mutations since evolutionary divergence	Provides molecular clock for timing evolutionary events
Horizontal Gene Transfer	Lateral movement of genetic material between organisms	Explains discontinuous distribution of BGCs across taxa

Phylogenetic Classification of Biosynthetic Gene Clusters

Regulatory Mechanism-Based Classification Framework

A groundbreaking approach to BGC classification focuses on phylogenetic analysis of regulatory elements linked to biosynthesis gene clusters. This method classifies BGCs according to regulatory mechanisms based on protein domain information, providing insights into activation conditions for silent gene clusters [23]. Researchers utilize Hidden Markov Models from protein domain databases to retrieve regulatory elements such as histidine kinases and transcription factors from BGCs, enabling systematic comparison across diverse actinobacterial strains from varied environments including oligotrophic basins, rainforests, and marine ecosystems [23].

This regulatory-focused phylogenetic classification has revealed that despite environmental variations, microorganisms often share similar regulatory mechanisms, suggesting the potential to activate new BGCs using activators known to affect previously characterized clusters [23]. By studying known activators of well-characterized BGCs, researchers can identify common patterns in regulatory mechanisms, offering potential activators for previously unexplored BGCs. This approach is particularly valuable because replicating natural conditions under artificial laboratory settings is practically impossible, making regulatory prediction essential for accessing microbial natural products from environmental strains [23].

Algorithmic Approaches for Phylogeny-Based Clustering

The phylogenetic relationships between sequences naturally define clusters based on evolutionary divergence. Advances in large-scale phylogenetic inference have made tree-based clustering increasingly practical, with algorithms that can solve optimization problems in linear time relative to tree size [24]. The TreeCluster tool implements several such algorithms, including:

• Max-diameter min-cut partitioning: Limits the maximum phylogenetic distance between any two sequences in a cluster
• Sum-length min-cut partitioning: Constrains the sum of branch lengths within each cluster
• Single-linkage min-cut partitioning: Controls chains of pairwise distances within clusters [24]

These tree-based clustering methods generate more internally consistent clusters than alternatives that use pairwise sequence distances without phylogenetic context, improving the effectiveness of downstream applications including microbiome OTU clustering, HIV transmission clustering, and divide-and-conquer multiple sequence alignment [24].

Figure 1: Phylogenetic Classification Workflow for BGC Activation

Application Notes: Phylogeny-Driven Discovery Frameworks

Bioactive Feature Targeting Strategy

The bioactive feature targeting approach exploits the evolutionary conservation of enzymes that install specific chemical moieties responsible for biological activity. This strategy recognizes that while natural products can be large and complex, they often contain smaller chemical features that directly lead to bioactivity [10]. These bioactive features fall into two main categories:

• Reactive features: Functional groups with electrophilic, radical, or nucleophilic reactivity that often result in covalent binding to protein targets
• Structural features: Elements important for non-covalent binding to biological or chemical targets, ranging from macromolecular proteins to small metal ions [10]

By targeting the biosynthetic enzymes responsible for installing these bioactive chemical features, researchers can mine genomic datasets for orphan BGCs predicted to produce natural products with specific target moieties. The resulting molecules may belong to entirely different compound families (e.g., peptide versus polyketide) while still containing the cognate bioactive feature [10].

Table 2: Reactive Chemical Features and Their Phylogenetic Tracking

Reactive Feature	Biosynthetic Enzymes	Genome Mining Application	Bioactivity Result
Enediyne	Polyketide Synthases (PKS)	Large-scale mining of 87 putative BGCs	Cytotoxicity via DNA diradical formation
β-Lactone	β-Lactone synthetases, Thioesterases, Hydrolases	Targeted mining for electrophile-containing NPs	Covalent inhibition of enzymatic targets
Epoxyketone	Flavin-dependent decarboxylase-dehydrogenase-monooxygenase	Phylogenetic tracking of epoxyketone installers	Proteasome inhibition and cytotoxicity
Isothiocyanate	Putative isonitrile synthase	Domain-based mining across Actinobacteria	Electrophilic reactivity with biological nucleophiles

Orthogonal Genome Mining for Stereodivergent Enzymes

Phylogenetic approaches have proven particularly valuable for discovering enzymes exhibiting unusual stereoselectivities, thereby expanding the enzymatic repertoire for constructing complex chiral architectures [25]. Comparative analyses have indicated that subtle variations in sequence and active-site environments produce diverse stereochemical outcomes across enzyme families [25]. This stereodivergent potential is especially valuable in pharmaceutical development where stereochemistry profoundly influences biological activity, as demonstrated by nature-inspired 3-Br-acivicin isomers showing distinct biological profiles based on their stereochemical configuration [25].

For example, phylogenetic analysis of 2-oxoglutarate-dependent dioxygenases has revealed enzymes capable of stereodivergent hydroxylation of proline derivatives, with significant implications for drug design [25]. Similarly, mechanistic characterization of diterpene synthase pairs from cyanobacteria has uncovered tricyclic diterpene biosynthesis pathways that would be difficult to identify without evolutionary guidance [25]. These advances not only deepen our mechanistic understanding of stereoselectivity but also lay the groundwork for rational enzyme engineering and the development of next-generation biocatalysts in pharmaceutical synthesis [25].

Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Phylogeny-Based BGC Prioritization

Objective: Identify and prioritize evolutionarily novel BGCs from genomic datasets for experimental characterization.

Materials and Reagents:

• Genomic sequences from target organisms
• High-performance computing infrastructure
• antiSMASH software for BGC detection [23]
• Phylogenetic analysis software (e.g., IQ-TREE, RAxML)
• MIBiG database for known BGC comparisons [23]

Procedure:

• BGC Detection and Annotation

  • Perform BGC prediction on all genomes using antiSMASH with default parameters [23]
  • Calculate BGC completeness using the BiG-FAM database [23]
  • Retain only complete BGCs for downstream analysis

• Regulatory Element Identification

  • Identify regulatory proteins using Hidden Markov Models from the Pfam database [23]
  • Focus on key regulatory domains: histidine kinases, transcription factors, and response regulators [23]
  • Extract protein sequences of identified regulatory elements

• Phylogenetic Reconstruction

  • Perform multiple sequence alignment of regulatory elements using MAFFT or ClustalOmega
  • Construct phylogenetic trees using maximum likelihood methods
  • Assess branch support with bootstrapping (minimum 100 replicates)

• Comparative Analysis and Prioritization

  • Compare regulatory phylogeny with taxonomic relationships of host organisms
  • Identify BGCs with evolutionarily distinct regulatory mechanisms
  • Prioritize BGCs that cluster separately from known characterized pathways

• Experimental Validation

  • Heterologously express prioritized BGCs in suitable host systems
  • Activate silent BGCs using predicted regulators based on phylogenetic neighbors [23]
  • Characterize chemical structures of resulting natural products

Troubleshooting:

• For poorly resolved phylogenies, consider adding more distant sequences as outgroups
• If regulatory elements are absent in BGCs, examine genomic context for nearby regulators
• For activation challenges, try chemical elicitors based on ecological niche of source organism

Protocol 2: Tree-Based Sequence Clustering for BGC Classification

Objective: Cluster homologous BGC sequences based on phylogenetic relationships to identify evolutionarily coherent groups.

Materials and Reagents:

• Multiple sequence alignment of homologous BGC genes
• Phylogenetic inference software (EPA-ng, IQ-TREE)
• TreeCluster tool for phylogenetic clustering [24]
• Computing resources capable of handling large phylogenetic trees

Procedure:

• Sequence Alignment and Tree Building

  • Generate high-quality multiple sequence alignment of core biosynthetic genes
  • Infer phylogenetic tree using approximate maximum likelihood methods for scalability [24]
  • Validate tree topology with appropriate model testing

• TreeCluster Implementation

  • Install TreeCluster from https://github.com/niemasd/TreeCluster [24]
  • Choose appropriate clustering criterion based on research goal:
    • Use max-diameter for controlling maximum diversity within clusters
    • Use sum-length for constraining total evolutionary divergence
    • Use single-linkage for limiting pairwise distance chains [24]
  • Set threshold parameter (α) based on desired cluster heterogeneity

• Cluster Validation and Analysis

  • Assess cluster coherence using statistical measures
  • Compare tree-based clusters with traditional distance-based methods
  • Map cluster assignments back to BGC features and chemical outputs

• Downstream Application

  • Use clusters as input for divide-and-conquer multiple sequence alignment [24]
  • Apply to OTU clustering for microbiome data analysis [24]
  • Implement in transmission clustering for epidemiological studies [24]

Troubleshooting:

• If clusters are too heterogeneous, decrease the threshold parameter α
• If clusters are too fragmented, increase α or try different clustering criteria
• For large datasets, ensure tree inference uses memory-efficient approximations

Figure 2: Tree-Based Clustering Workflow for BGC Discovery

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Phylogeny-Guided Discovery

Reagent/Resource	Function	Application Note
antiSMASH	BGC detection and annotation	Primary tool for initial BGC identification; use version 6.0 or higher for comprehensive analysis [23]
MIBiG Database	Repository of known BGCs	Reference for comparative analysis; essential for determining novelty of discovered BGCs [23]
Pfam Database	Protein domain families	Source of HMMs for regulatory element identification; critical for phylogenetic classification [23]
TreeCluster	Phylogeny-based sequence clustering	Implements efficient algorithms for clustering sequences based on evolutionary relationships [24]
HMMER	Sequence homology detection	Used with Pfam HMMs to identify regulatory domains in BGCs [23]
BiG-FAM	BGC family database	Assesses completeness of predicted BGCs; helps filter partial clusters [23]

Phylogeny-guided approaches have fundamentally transformed natural product discovery by providing evolutionary context to biosynthetic gene clusters. By leveraging phylogenetic relationships, researchers can prioritize BGCs with higher probability of encoding novel chemistry and bioactivity. The integration of regulatory element analysis with biosynthetic gene phylogeny presents a particularly promising avenue for activating silent gene clusters that have eluded traditional cultivation-based approaches [23].

As genomic databases continue to expand, phylogeny-based methods will become increasingly sophisticated, potentially incorporating machine learning approaches to predict chemical structures from evolutionary relationships. The development of faster phylogenetic inference algorithms capable of handling millions of sequences will further enhance our ability to mine the rapidly growing genomic data for novel natural products [24]. These advances will continue to bridge the gap between genetic potential and chemical reality, unlocking nature's untapped pharmaceutical resources through the lens of evolution.

Fungal-derived natural products represent an indispensable resource for drug discovery, providing foundational scaffolds for many clinically used antibiotics, immunosuppressants, and anticancer agents [26]. However, under standard laboratory conditions, a significant constraint emerges: fungi predominantly produce a limited and repetitive set of secondary metabolites, leading to the frequent rediscovery of known compounds [26]. This challenge is particularly relevant for the genus Diaporthe, a group known to include plant pathogens, endophytes, and saprobes with considerable biosynthetic potential that remains largely underexplored [27].

Advances in genome sequencing have revealed that a primary reason for this limited metabolic output is that a vast portion of fungal biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) remain "silent" or unexpressed under conventional cultivation paradigms [26] [28]. This case study details a comprehensive investigation of the endophytic fungus Diaporthe kyushuensis ZMU-48-1, isolated from decayed leaves of Acacia confusa Merr. [26]. By integrating whole-genome sequencing with the One-Strain-Many-Compounds (OSMAC) strategy, this research systematically unlocked a portion of this strain's cryptic biosynthetic potential, leading to the discovery of novel antifungal compounds [26] [29].

Genomic Analysis ofDiaporthe kyushuensisZMU-48-1

Genome Sequencing and Bioinformatics Pipeline

The genomic DNA of D. kyushuensis ZMU-48-1 was extracted from mycelia cultured in Potato Dextrose Broth (PDB) for six days. The sequencing library was prepared using the Hieff NGS MaxUp II DNA Library Prep Kit and sequenced on an Illumina platform [26] [29]. Subsequent gene prediction identified 13,872 coding sequences, alongside tRNA and rRNA genes [29].

BGC identification was performed using antiSMASH (version 6.1.1) with the taxon specified as "fungi" and the gene-finding tool set to GlimmerHMM [26] [29]. This analysis predicted a remarkable 98 BGCs within the genome, far exceeding the number of compounds typically detected in a single fermentation experiment [26].

Biosynthetic Gene Cluster Diversity

The 98 BGCs were categorized into known types, revealing a rich and diverse biosynthetic capacity. A breakdown of the major BGC types is provided in Table 1.

Table 1: Diversity of Biosynthetic Gene Clusters (BGCs) in D. kyushuensis ZMU-48-1

BGC Type	Number Identified	Abbreviation
Non-Ribosomal Peptide Synthetase	17	NRPS
Type I Polyketide Synthase	16	T1PKS
Terpene	15	-
NRPS-like	9	-
Hybrid BGCs (NRPS-T1PKS)	2	-
Other (β-lactone, indole, etc.)	39	-
Total	98	-

Data sourced from [26].

Critically, approximately 60% of these BGCs showed no significant homology to any known gene clusters in databases, highlighting their potential novelty and positioning D. kyushuensis as a high-priority candidate for natural product discovery [26]. This finding aligns with broader genomic studies that rank Diaporthe among the fungal genera with the highest potential for secondary metabolite synthesis [30].

Protocol: Activating Cryptic BGCs via the OSMAC Strategy

The OSMAC approach is a powerful, non-genetic method for awakening silent BGCs by altering cultivation parameters. The following protocol was applied to D. kyushuensis ZMU-48-1 to induce diverse secondary metabolites [26].

Small-Scale Fermentation and Metabolite Profiling

• Seed Culture Preparation: Inoculate D. kyushuensis ZMU-48-1 from a fresh agar plate into 500 mL Erlenmeyer flasks containing 200 mL of Potato Dextrose Broth (PDB). Incubate at 28°C with shaking at 180 rpm for 48 hours to generate a homogeneous seed culture [26] [29].
• Experimental Fermentation: Aliquot 5 mL of the seed culture into a series of 250 mL flasks, each containing 100 mL of a different production medium. Key media variants included:
  • Standard PDB (control)
  • PDB supplemented with 3% (w/v) NaBr
  • PDB supplemented with 3% (w/v) sea salt
  • Rice solid medium [26] [29]
• Incubation: Cultivate the flasks at 28°C under static conditions for 45 days to allow for extensive secondary metabolite production [26].
• Metabolite Extraction:
  • For liquid cultures, partition the entire culture broth (broth and mycelia) with ethyl acetate (EA) three times.
  • For solid rice medium, soak and extract three times with ethanol, concentrate the combined ethanol extract, and then partition with ethyl acetate [26] [29].
  • Combine all organic extracts for each condition and concentrate under reduced pressure using a rotary evaporator to obtain crude extracts.
• HPLC Analysis: Analyze each crude extract via High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) using a C18 column and an acetonitrile-water gradient. Compare the chromatographic profiles to identify the medium that induces the most diverse and unique metabolite array [26] [29].

Large-Scale Fermentation and Compound Isolation

• Scale-Up: Based on the HPLC results, perform large-scale fermentation (e.g., 10 L) using the most productive media conditions (PDB with 3% NaBr, PDB with 3% sea salt, and rice medium) [26].
• Extraction and Fractionation: Extract the cultures as described in Step 4. Subject the resulting crude extracts to silica gel vacuum liquid chromatography (VLC), eluting with a stepped gradient from 100% petroleum ether (PE) to 100% ethyl acetate (EA) [26] [29].
• Purification: Further purify metabolite-rich fractions using preparative HPLC with phenyl or C18 columns and isocratic or shallow gradients of acetonitrile in water. Monitor elution with a photodiode array detector at multiple wavelengths (e.g., 220, 254, 275, 310 nm) [26] [29].

Results: Metabolite Discovery and Antifungal Activity

Structural Diversity of Isolated Compounds

The integrated genome mining and OSMAC approach yielded 18 structurally diverse secondary metabolites [26]. These included:

• Two novel pyrrole derivatives: Kyushuenine A (1) and Kyushuenine B (2), which featured a rare 2-methylpyrrol-3-yl ethanone scaffold. Their structures were elucidated using extensive 1D and 2D NMR spectroscopy and high-resolution mass spectrometry [26] [29].
• Sixteen known compounds: A suite of previously reported metabolites, including phenolics like alternariol and its derivatives, as well as other compounds such as cyclo-(L-Pro-L-Tyr) and uracil [26].

The successful induction of these metabolites, particularly the novel kyushuenines, demonstrates the efficacy of using NaBr supplementation in PDB to activate cryptic BGCs that are silent under standard culture conditions [26].

Antifungal Activity Screening

All isolated compounds were evaluated for their antifungal activity against several phytopathogenic fungi using a minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) assay. The results, summarized in Table 2, identified two compounds with significant biological activity [26] [29].

Table 2: Antifungal Activity of Selected Metabolites from D. kyushuensis ZMU-48-1

Compound Number	Compound Name / Type	Tested Phytopathogen	MIC (μg/mL)
8	A known phenolic compound	Bipolaris sorokiniana	200
18	A known phenolic compound	Botryosphaeria dothidea	50
Carbendazim	(Commercial control)	Botryosphaeria dothidea	1.0625
Other Compounds	(Various)	Multiple Pathogens	>200

Data compiled from [26] [29]. MIC: Minimum Inhibitory Concentration.

While the potency of these compounds was moderate compared to the commercial fungicide carbendazim, their activity underscores the potential of mining Diaporthe species for novel antifungal lead structures. Further medicinal chemistry optimization could enhance their efficacy and drug-like properties [26].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

The following table details key reagents and materials essential for replicating this genome mining and natural product discovery pipeline.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Reagent / Material	Function / Application	Specific Example / Note
antiSMASH Software	Bioinformatics tool for the automated genomic identification and analysis of BGCs.	Version 6.1.1; critical for initial BGC prediction and prioritization [26].
Potato Dextrose Broth (PDB)	Standard liquid culture medium for fungal cultivation.	Serves as the base for OSMAC modifications [26].
Chemical Elicitors (NaBr, Sea Salt)	Used in OSMAC strategy to perturb metabolism and activate silent BGCs.	3% (w/v) supplementation in PDB was highly effective for D. kyushuensis [26].
Rice Solid Medium	Solid fermentation medium for fungal secondary metabolite production.	Mimics a natural substrate, often inducing different BGCs than liquid media [26].
Ethyl Acetate (EA)	Organic solvent for liquid-liquid extraction of secondary metabolites from culture broth.	Used to partition metabolites from both aqueous broth and mycelia [26].
Silica Gel	Stationary phase for column chromatography for initial fractionation of crude extracts.	300-400 mesh; used with PE-EA gradient systems [26] [29].
Preparative HPLC	Final purification step to isolate individual compounds from fractions.	Utilized C18 and Phenyl columns with acetonitrile-water gradients [26] [29].
NMR Spectroscopy	Primary technique for determining the structure of purified compounds.	Bruker AVANCE III 600 MHz spectrometer was used in this study [26].
2-Oxo-Zoniporide Hydrochloride	2-Oxo-Zoniporide Hydrochloride, MF:C17H17ClN6O2, MW:372.8 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
Valiolamine	Valiolamine, CAS:83465-22-9, MF:C7H15NO5, MW:193.20 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

This case study demonstrates that integrating genome mining with experimental OSMAC strategies is a highly effective paradigm for natural product discovery. The genome sequence of Diaporthe kyushuensis ZMU-48-1 revealed an enormous, previously unappreciated biosynthetic potential of 98 BGCs. Through simple modifications of culture conditions, this potential was partially unlocked, leading to the isolation of 18 metabolites, including two novel pyrrole derivatives with antifungal activity [26].

Despite this success, the majority of the BGCs in D. kyushuensis remain silent, indicating that the full chemical arsenal of this strain is yet to be revealed. Future work should focus on more targeted activation strategies, including:

• Heterologous Expression: Cloning and expressing entire silent BGCs in a tractable fungal host like Aspergillus oryzae [28] [31].
• Promoter Engineering: Genetically manipulating native regulatory elements to force the expression of specific silent clusters [26].
• Transcriptomic Profiling: Using RNA-seq to identify clusters that are transcriptionally silent and understand their regulation [26].

The continued exploration of Diaporthe species and other underutilized fungal genera, guided by genomic insights, promises to significantly expand the chemical space available for the discovery of next-generation therapeutic agents.

From Sequence to Compound: Methodologies and Practical Applications

The discovery of natural products (NPs), also referred to as secondary metabolites, is a cornerstone of drug development, providing a significant proportion of clinically approved antibiotics, chemotherapeutics, and immunosuppressants [10] [2] [32]. Traditionally, NP discovery relied on bioactivity-guided isolation from microbial sources, a process often hampered by high rediscovery rates and the inability to cultivate most microorganisms in the laboratory [10] [2]. The sequencing of microbial genomes revealed a vast, untapped reservoir of biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs)—collocated groups of genes encoding the biosynthesis of these compounds—far exceeding the number of known metabolites from these organisms [2] [33]. This revelation spurred a paradigm shift towards genome mining, a bioinformatics-driven approach that leverages genomic data to identify and characterize BGCs, enabling the targeted discovery of novel bioactive molecules [10] [33].

This application note details three essential bioinformatics tools—antiSMASH, PRISM, and IMG/ABC—that have become integral to modern genome mining workflows within natural product discovery research. We provide a comparative analysis of their core functionalities, detailed protocols for their application, and a visualization of the integrated workflow, equipping researchers with the knowledge to systematically uncover the hidden biosynthetic potential encoded in microbial genomes.

The field of genome mining is supported by several sophisticated computational platforms, each with distinct strengths. The table below summarizes the primary characteristics of antiSMASH, PRISM, and IMG/ABC.

Table 1: Core Features of antiSMASH, PRISM, and IMG/ABC

Feature	antiSMASH	PRISM	IMG/ABC
Primary Function	BGC Detection & Annotation	BGC Detection & Chemical Structure Prediction	BGC Database & Comparative Analysis
Key Methodology	Rule-based identification using profile HMMs [34]	Combinatorial algorithm for structural prediction [35]	Curated repository of predicted & known BGCs [36]
BGC Types Covered	>50 types, including PKS, NRPS, RiPPs, terpenes [36]	PKS, NRPS, and ribosomally synthesized peptides [35]	All types predicted by antiSMASH (e.g., PKS, NRPS, RiPPs) [36]
Chemical Prediction	Yes (e.g., NRPS A-domain specificity, terpene cyclization) [32]	Yes (predicts putative chemical structures) [35]	Limited, primarily functional annotation of genes [36]
Data Source	User-submitted genomic data [32]	User-submitted genomic data [35]	Pre-computed and integrated public isolate genomes & metagenomes [36]
Use Case	De novo identification of BGCs in a genome	In-depth structural prediction for prioritized BGCs	Large-scale genomic context analysis and BGC prioritization

Integrated Workflow for Natural Product Discovery

A typical genome mining project involves the sequential use of these tools, from initial BGC detection to structural prediction and contextual analysis. The following diagram illustrates this integrated workflow and the role of each tool within it.

Figure 1: Integrated genome mining workflow. The process begins with a genome sequence, which is analyzed by antiSMASH for BGC detection. Results are funneled to PRISM for detailed chemical structure prediction and to IMG/ABC for comparative analysis and contextualization within public datasets, leading to a final list of prioritized BGCs.

Application Notes & Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: BGC Identification with antiSMASH

antiSMASH (antibiotics & Secondary Metabolite Analysis SHell) is the most widely used tool for the initial identification of BGCs in bacterial, fungal, and plant genomes [32]. Its pipeline uses a library of profile hidden Markov models (profile HMMs) to detect core biosynthetic enzymes and their associated genetic neighborhoods [34].

Table 2: Key Research Reagents for BGC Identification

Research Reagent / Resource	Function in Protocol
antiSMASH Web Server (http://antismash.secondarymetabolites.org) [32]	Primary platform for submitting genomic data and performing BGC analysis.
Input Genomic Data (FASTA format for sequence; GBK for annotations)	The query material; annotated GenBank files yield more accurate results than raw sequence alone.
MIBiG (Minimum Information about a Biosynthetic Gene Cluster) Repository [32] [33]	A curated database of experimentally characterized BGCs used for comparative analysis (ClusterBlast).
Pfam Database [32]	A collection of protein domain families used by tools like ClusterFinder to identify BGC-like regions.

Step-by-Step Procedure:

• Data Preparation: Obtain the genome sequence of the target organism. While antiSMASH can analyze a FASTA file of nucleotide sequences, providing an annotated GenBank (GBK) file is strongly recommended, as it significantly improves the accuracy of gene calling and subsequent BGC prediction.
• Job Submission: Navigate to the antiSMASH web server. Upload your genomic file (GBK or FASTA) and provide a valid email address to receive notification upon job completion. Select relevant analysis parameters:
  • For bacterial genomes, enable the ClusterFinder algorithm to help predict the boundaries of BGCs based on Pfam domain frequencies [32].
  • For fungal genomes, you may select the CASSIS algorithm for cluster boundary prediction based on shared regulatory motifs [32].
• Results Interpretation: Once processed, the antiSMASH results page will provide an interactive view of the identified BGC regions. Key outputs include:
  • Region Overview: A graphical map of each predicted BGC, color-coded by BGC type (e.g., T1PKS, NRPS, RiPP).
  • Detailed Annotation: Clicking on a specific region reveals detailed information, including the specific antiSMASH rule used for prediction, core biosynthetic genes, and putative substrate specificity predictions for domains like NRPS adenylation domains using the SANDPUMA algorithm [32].
  • Comparative Analysis: Use the ClusterBlast and KnownClusterBlast modules to compare the identified BGC against the MIBiG database and other genomic datasets to assess novelty and identify closely related characterized clusters [32].

Protocol 2: In-depth Structural Prediction with PRISM

PRISM (Prediction Informatics for Secondary Metabolome) is a genome mining tool that extends beyond BGC identification to predict the chemical structures of encoded compounds, particularly non-ribosomal peptides (NRPs), polyketides (PKs), and ribosomally synthesized and post-translationally modified peptides (RiPPs) [35].

Step-by-Step Procedure:

• BGC Prioritization: Input the BGCs identified from the antiSMASH analysis into PRISM. Prioritization can be based on criteria such as phylogenetic novelty, absence in the MIBiG database, or the presence of resistance genes that suggest bioactivity [10] [2].
• Structure Prediction: PRISM employs a combinatorial algorithm to predict the final chemical structure of the metabolite encoded by the BGC.
  • For NRPS/PKS clusters, the algorithm interprets the colinearity between biosynthetic modules and the substrate specificities of catalytic domains (e.g., adenylation domains for NRPS, acyltransferase domains for PKS) to predict the linear peptide or polyketide backbone [35].
  • The algorithm also accounts for post-assembly line tailoring reactions (e.g., oxidations, methylations, glycosylations) predicted from the presence of corresponding genes (e.g., cytochrome P450s, methyltransferases) within the BGC [35].
• Output Analysis: PRISM outputs a set of candidate chemical structures. Researchers can use these predictions to guide downstream experimental work, such as:
  • Mass Spectrometry (MS) Screening: Calculating the expected mass-to-charge ratio (m/z) of the predicted compound to search for its presence in metabolomic extracts [35].
  • Heterologous Expression: Selecting high-priority, novel BGCs for cloning and expression in a surrogate host like Streptomyces coelicolor or Aspergillus nidulans to produce the compound [2].

Protocol 3: Contextual Analysis using IMG/ABC

IMG/ABC (Integrated Microbial Genomes/Atlas of Biosynthetic Gene Clusters) is a massive public database that provides a context-rich environment for analyzing BGCs across thousands of publicly available genomes and metagenomes [36]. It is invaluable for understanding the taxonomic and ecological distribution of BGCs.

Step-by-Step Procedure:

• Data Access and Querying: Access the public IMG/ABC interface (https://img.jgi.doe.gov/abc-public). Use the "Search BGCs" function to find BGCs of interest by attributes such as BGC type (e.g., NRPS, T1PKS), taxonomy of the host organism, or specific Pfam domains [36].
• Comparative Analysis: Use the "Browse BGCs" menu to explore BGCs from multiple perspectives:
  • Browse by Taxonomy: Visualize the distribution of BGC types across the tree of life using interactive tree maps, allowing for the identification of phyla or classes enriched for specific BGC types [36].
  • Browse by Ecosystem: Investigate the correlation between BGCs and their source environment (e.g., marine, soil, human gut), which can suggest ecological roles and potential bioactivities [36].
• Linking to Omics Data: IMG/ABC integrates ecosystem metadata from the GOLD (Genomes Online Database) project. This allows researchers to cross-reference BGCs with environmental parameters, facilitating ecology-driven discovery hypotheses. For instance, a BGC found exclusively in marine symbionts may encode compounds with specific defensive functions [36].

The integration of antiSMASH, PRISM, and IMG/ABC creates a powerful synergistic pipeline for modern natural product discovery. antiSMASH serves as the essential first-pass tool for comprehensive BGC detection, PRISM provides deep chemical insights to prioritize and predict structures and IMG/ABC offers the broad ecological and genomic context necessary to guide hypothesis-driven research. Mastery of these tools allows researchers to transition from simply identifying BGCs to strategically selecting the most promising candidates for experimental characterization, thereby accelerating the discovery of novel bioactive molecules for drug development and other biotechnological applications.

The discovery of novel bioactive natural products is crucial for drug development, yet traditional methods often face challenges with dereplication and efficiency. Genome mining has emerged as a transformative strategy, leveraging genomic data to uncover biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) encoding novel compounds [25]. This application note details two advanced genome mining strategies—Resistance Gene-Guided Discovery and the GATOR-GC tool—providing detailed protocols for their implementation in targeted natural product discovery pipelines. These approaches enable researchers to prioritize BGCs with a high probability of encoding bioactive compounds, streamlining the discovery process for pharmaceutical applications [10].

Resistance Gene-Guided Discovery

Conceptual Basis and Applications

Resistance gene-guided discovery operates on the principle that organisms possessing a BGC for a bioactive natural product often co-encode self-resistance mechanisms, such as specialized transporters or resistant target enzymes [10]. These resistance genes serve as effective "biosynthetic hooks" for targeted mining. This strategy is particularly valuable for discovering compounds with specific biological activities, as the presence of a dedicated resistance gene implies the natural product interacts with an essential cellular target with sufficient potency to necessitate a self-protection mechanism [10]. This approach has been successfully applied to discover new ribosomally synthesized and post-translationally modified peptides (RiPPs), glycopeptides, and other antimicrobial compounds.

Table 1: Types of Resistance Mechanisms Used in Genome Mining

Resistance Mechanism	Target Compound Class	Function in Self-Resistance	Example Natural Product
ATP-Binding Cassette (ABC) Transporters	Various antimicrobials	Efflux of the toxic compound from the producer strain	Numerous RiPPs and glycopeptides
Target Modification Enzymes (Methyltransferases, etc.)	Ribosome-targeting antibiotics	Modification of the cellular target (e.g., 23S rRNA) to prevent binding	Thiopeptides, Macrolices
Drug-Inactivating Enzymes (Kinases, Acetyltransferases)	Aminoglycosides, Enediynes	Enzymatic alteration of the compound to neutralize its toxicity	Calicheamicin [10]

Detailed Experimental Protocol

Protocol 1: Identifying BGCs with Co-localized Resistance Genes

• Sequence Dataset Curation:

  • Obtain genomic sequences of interest from public databases (e.g., NCBI, JGI) or in-house strain collections. Whole Genome Shotgun (WGS) assemblies are typically used [37].

• In Silico BGC Prediction:

  • Process all genomic sequences through standard BGC prediction software such as antiSMASH to identify core biosynthetic machinery [10].

• Resistance Gene Identification:

  • Query Sequence Selection: Compile a set of known resistance gene sequences (e.g., for ABC transporters, methyltransferases) from databases like CARD (Comprehensive Antibiotic Resistance Database) or from literature.
  • Homology Search: Use BLASTP or HMMER to search for homologs of your query resistance genes within the predicted BGCs. Use a sensitive e-value threshold (e.g., 1e-5) and examine sequence identity (>30% is often a starting point).
  • Co-localization Analysis: Manually inspect the genomic context of significant hits. A positive hit is confirmed if the resistance gene is located within the boundaries of the predicted BGC or in its immediate vicinity (usually within 10-20 kb).

• Prioritization and Downstream Processing:

  • Prioritize BGCs containing resistance genes for heterologous expression or activation in the native host. The specific resistance mechanism can provide clues about the compound's mode of action [10].

The following workflow diagram outlines the bioinformatics pipeline for this protocol:

GATOR-GC for Exploratory Genome Mining

GATOR-GC (Gene Cluster Analysis Tool for Orthologous Groups) is a targeted genome mining tool designed for the comprehensive and flexible exploration of gene cluster evolutionary diversity, which is often overlooked by other tools [37]. It enables researchers to map the taxonomic and evolutionary patterns of BGCs across large genomic datasets. A key feature of GATOR-GC is its proximity-weighted similarity scoring, which successfully differentiates closely related BGCs, such as those in the FK-family (e.g., rapamycin, FK506), according to their specific chemical features [37]. In a single execution, it can identify millions of gene clusters similar to experimentally validated BGCs that are missed by other methods, making it invaluable for exploratory mining and evolutionary studies [37].

Table 2: GATOR-GC Performance and Application Data

Metric	Description	Utility in Research
Diversity Identified	Identified over 4 million gene clusters similar to known BGCs [37]	Reveals vast untapped chemical space and evolutionary lineages of BGCs.
Proximity-Weighted Scoring	Weights gene similarity based on physical proximity within the cluster [37]	Improves accuracy in linking genetic similarity to specific chemical outputs (e.g., FK506 vs. rapamycin clusters).
Application Example	Mapped taxonomic patterns of genomic islands for 7-deazapurine DNA modification [37]	Enables hypothesis generation about the distribution and evolution of specific biosynthetic pathways.

Detailed Experimental Protocol

Protocol 2: Targeted Mining with GATOR-GC

• Installation and Setup:

  • GATOR-GC is available at https://github.com/chevrettelab/gator-gc. Follow the installation instructions in the repository, ensuring all dependencies (e.g., Python, BioPython, HMMER) are installed.

• Input Preparation:

  • Prepare a file containing the genomic sequences (in FASTA format) you wish to mine.
  • Prepare a "seed" or "query" BGC. This can be a known BGC sequence in GenBank format or a cluster from an antiSMASH result that you want to find relatives of.

• Tool Execution:

  • Run GATOR-GC from the command line. A basic command structure is: python gator-gc.py --genomes <genome_files.fa> --query <query_cluster.gbk> --output <results_directory>
  • Several parameters can be adjusted, such as:
    • --similarity: Adjust the minimum similarity threshold for hits.
    • --cores: Specify the number of CPU cores to use for parallel processing.

• Output Analysis and Interpretation:

  • GATOR-GC generates output files listing the identified homologous gene clusters, their similarity scores, and genomic locations.
  • Analyze the phylogenetic distribution of hits to understand the evolutionary spread of the BGC family.
  • Use the proximity-weighted similarity scores to prioritize clusters that are genetically distinct and likely to produce novel chemical variants.

The Scientist's Toolkit

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Targeted Genome Mining

Reagent / Resource	Function / Application	Example / Source
antiSMASH	Standard tool for the automated identification and annotation of Biosynthetic Gene Clusters (BGCs) from genomic data [10].	https://antismash.secondarymetabolites.org/
GATOR-GC Software	Targeted genome mining tool for comprehensive exploration of gene cluster evolutionary diversity and proximity-weighted similarity scoring [37].	https://github.com/chevrettelab/gator-gc
CARD (Comprehensive Antibiotic Resistance Database)	Curated database of resistance genes; provides reference sequences for resistance gene-guided discovery searches [10].	https://card.mcmaster.ca/
NCBI Genome & JGI Databases	Primary public repositories for genomic sequence data, serving as the foundational dataset for large-scale mining efforts [37] [10].	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genome/ ; https://jgi.doe.gov/
HMMER Suite	Software for sequence homology searches using profile Hidden Markov Models, more sensitive than BLAST for distant homologs.	http://hmmer.org/
BLAST+ Suite	Standard tool for performing initial homology searches (e.g., BLASTP) to find resistance gene homologs or similar BGCs.	https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
Heterologous Expression Host (e.g., S. albus)	Genetically tractable host strain used for expressing cryptic or silent BGCs to produce and isolate the encoded natural product.	Commonly used engineered Streptomyces strains
3'-O-Demethylpreussomerin I	3'-O-Demethylpreussomerin I - CAS 158204-29-6	High-purity 3'-O-Demethylpreussomerin I, a fungal metabolite for antimicrobial and cytotoxicity research. For Research Use Only. Not for human use.
Vapreotide Acetate	Vapreotide Acetate, CAS:116430-60-5, MF:C59H74N12O11S2, MW:1191.4 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

The advent of widespread microbial genome sequencing has revealed a profound disparity between the number of biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) encoded in a microbe's DNA and the number of secondary metabolites it actually produces under standard laboratory conditions. The majority of these BGCs are "silent" or "cryptic," representing an immense untapped reservoir of novel chemical entities with potential drug leads [38] [2] [39]. This application note details three powerful, cultivation-based strategies—OSMAC, co-cultivation, and epigenetic manipulation—designed to awaken these silent clusters. Framed within a modern thesis on genome mining, these methods provide the essential experimental link between bioinformatic predictions and the discovery of novel natural products, offering a pathway to address pressing challenges such as antimicrobial resistance [40] [41].

The OSMAC (One Strain Many Compounds) Strategy

The OSMAC approach is a pleiotropic method founded on a simple principle: systematically altering a microbe's cultivation parameters can trigger global alterations in its metabolic pathways, thereby activating silent genes [38]. It is one of the simplest and most effective methods to rapidly expand the chemical diversity accessible from a single microbial strain [38] [42].

• Protocol: Implementing a Basic OSMAC Screen

  • Strain Preparation: Inoculate the microbe of interest (e.g., a filamentous fungus or actinobacterium) from a glycerol stock onto a solid agar plate to obtain fresh, viable colonies.
  • Media Variation: Inoculate multiple culture flasks containing different liquid media. A standard panel should include:
    • Potato Dextrose Broth (PDB)
    • Czapek-Dox Broth
    • Glucose-Yeast-Malt (GYM) medium
    • A complex-rich medium (e.g., containing wheat, rice, or other grain solids) [42] [26].
  • Parameter Modification: For each media type, create sub-conditions by altering key parameters.
    • Salt Stress: Add sea salt (e.g., 3%) or sodium bromide (NaBr, 3%) to the medium [26].
    • Physical State: Culture the strain on solid agar medium versus liquid broth [40].
    • Aeration: Incubate flasks under shaking (e.g., 180 rpm) versus static conditions.
  • Fermentation and Extraction: Incubate cultures at an appropriate temperature (e.g., 28°C) for a defined period (typically 7-14 days). Subsequently, separate the biomass from the broth via filtration. Extract the broth with a suitable organic solvent like ethyl acetate, and the mycelia with methanol. Combine and concentrate the extracts for analysis [40] [26].
  • Analysis: Employ analytical techniques such as Thin-Layer Chromatography (TLC) and Ultra-High-Performance Liquid Chromatography with Diode Array Detection (uHPLC-DAD) to profile the metabolic differences between the various cultures [40].

• Exemplary Workflow and Data Output: The application of the OSMAC strategy to the endophytic fungus Diaporthe kyushuensis ZMU-48-1, which had 98 predicted BGCs, demonstrated the power of this approach. Cultivation in PDB alone versus PDB supplemented with 3% NaBr led to significant differences in metabolite profiles, culminating in the isolation of 18 compounds, including two novel antifungal pyrrole derivatives [26]. The table below summarizes quantitative data from OSMAC studies.

Table 1: Quantitative Outcomes from Selected OSMAC Studies

Microbial Strain	OSMAC Condition	Key Metabolites Discovered	Bioactivity (Minimum Inhibitory Concentration - MIC)	Reference
Talaromyces pinophilus	Variation in 5 culture media	Phenolic compounds (e.g., caffeic acid)	Antimicrobial (MIC range: 78 - 5000 µg/mL)	[40]
Penicillium paxilli	Variation in 5 culture media	Phenolic compounds (e.g., chlorogenic acid)	Antimicrobial (MIC range: 78 - 5000 µg/mL)	[40]
Diaporthe kyushuensis	PDB + 3% NaBr	Kyushuenines A & B (novel pyrroles) & 16 known compounds	Antifungal vs. Botryosphaeria dothidea (MIC = 50 µg/mL for compound 18)	[26]
Eurotium rubrum	Wheat medium vs. Czapek-Dox	Isoechinulin D (new diketopiperazine)	Cytotoxic activity	[42]

Co-cultivation simulates a microbial community environment in the laboratory. The presence of another microbe acts as a biotic elicitor, triggering defense or competition responses that often involve the production of antimicrobial or signaling secondary metabolites from previously silent BGCs [42] [39]. This strategy can unlock chemical diversity that is inaccessible in axenic cultures.

• Protocol: Co-cultivation of a Target Bacterium with a Fungal Elicitor

  • Strain Selection: Select the target bacterium (e.g., a Streptomyces species with many silent BGCs) and an elicitor strain. Common choices include non-pathogenic bacteria (e.g., Bacillus subtilis) or fungi (e.g., Aspergillus niger) from the same habitat [42].
  • Cultivation Setup:
    • Dual Agar Plate Method: On a large Petri dish containing a solid medium (e.g., ISP2 agar), inoculate the target bacterium and the fungal elicitor as large plugs at opposite ends. Maintain a distance of ~3-4 cm between them.
    • Liquid Co-culture: Inoculate the target bacterium and the elicitor into the same flask of liquid medium simultaneously.
    • Control: Prepare separate axenic cultures of each strain under identical conditions.
  • Incubation: Incubate the co-culture and controls at 25-28°C for 5-10 days, or until a clear interaction zone (e.g., inhibition or pigmentation) is observed on solid media.
  • Extraction and Analysis: For agar plates, excise the entire area of the plate, including the interaction zone, and extract it with ethyl acetate. For liquid cultures, perform a whole-broth extraction. Compare the chemical profile of the co-culture extract to the combined profiles of the individual control cultures using UHPLC-MS. Novel peaks in the co-culture indicate induced metabolites [42].

• Exemplary Workflow and Data Output: Co-cultivation has been successfully used to induce the production of the antibiotic keyicin from a marine invertebrate-associated bacterium [43]. Another study demonstrated that the addition of a mycolic acid-containing bacterium to a culture of a rare actinomycete stimulated the tandem cyclization of a polyene macrolactam [38]. The table below outlines key reagents for co-cultivation and other methods.

Table 2: Research Reagent Solutions for Activating Silent Gene Clusters

Reagent / Material	Function / Application	Specific Example
Ethyl Acetate	Organic solvent for broad-spectrum extraction of secondary metabolites from fermentation broth.	Standard solvent for liquid-liquid extraction [40] [26].
Sea Salt / NaBr	Inorganic salt used in OSMAC to simulate marine environment or impose osmotic/ionic stress.	PDB supplemented with 3% sea salt or 3% NaBr [26].
5-Azacytidine (5-AZA)	DNA methyltransferase (DNMT) inhibitor; an epigenetic modifier that reactivates genes silenced by DNA methylation.	Added to culture medium at sub-inhibitory concentrations (e.g., 5-50 µM) [42].
Suberoylanilide Hydroxamic Acid (SAHA)	Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor; an epigenetic modifier that facilitates gene transcription.	Added to culture medium at sub-inhibitory concentrations [42].
Elicitor Strains	Biotic elicitors (bacteria/fungi) used in co-cultivation to mimic ecological interactions.	Bacillus subtilis, Aspergillus niger, or a mycolic acid-containing bacterium [38] [42].

Epigenetic Manipulation

Epigenetic manipulation involves the use of small molecule chemicals to inhibit enzymes responsible for chromatin remodeling, such as DNA methyltransferases (DNMTs) and histone deacetylases (HDACs). In fungi, this leads to a more open chromatin structure, facilitating the transcription of silent BGCs [43] [42].

• Protocol: Treatment with Epigenetic Modifiers

  • Strain Cultivation: Inoculate the fungal strain in a standard liquid medium (e.g., PDB) and incubate with shaking for 24-48 hours to establish active growth.
  • Elicitor Addition: Aseptically add a filter-sterilized solution of the epigenetic modifier to the culture.
    • Common Inhibitors:
      • HDAC Inhibitors: Suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA), nicotinamide. Typical working concentration: 5-100 µM.
      • DNMT Inhibitors: 5-Azacytidine (5-AZA). Typical working concentration: 5-50 µM.
    • Control: Add an equivalent volume of sterile solvent (e.g., DMSO) to a parallel control culture.
  • Continued Incubation: Return the cultures to the shaker and continue incubation for an additional 5-10 days to allow for the induction and accumulation of secondary metabolites.
  • Extraction and Metabolite Analysis: Harvest the culture by filtration. Extract the broth with ethyl acetate and the mycelia with methanol. Analyze and compare the treated and control extracts using UHPLC-HRMS to identify metabolites unique to or enhanced in the treated sample [42].

• Exemplary Workflow and Data Output: This approach has been successfully applied to various fungi. For instance, the addition of 5-AZA and SAHA to a culture of the marine-derived fungus Aspergillus versicolor induced the production of diketopiperazine and diphenylether derivatives that were not detected in the control [42]. Similarly, treatment of Penicillium herquei with SAHA led to the production of three new α-pyrone derivatives [38].

Integrated Workflow for a Genome-Mining Driven Thesis

For a thesis centered on genome mining, these wet-lab techniques are not standalone exercises but are integral to validating computational predictions. The following workflow outlines how to integrate these methods.

• Protocol: A Genome Mining-Guided Discovery Pipeline
  • Genome Sequencing and in silico Analysis: Sequence the genome of your target microbial strain. Use bioinformatics platforms like antiSMASH to identify and locate all potential BGCs. Prioritize BGCs that show low homology to known clusters, indicating potential novelty [2] [26].
  • Designing Elicitation Experiments: Based on the number and type of BGCs, design a matrix of experiments.
    • If the strain has many BGCs (e.g., >50), initiate a broad OSMAC screen.
    • If specific regulatory elements are predicted near a BGC, target it with relevant epigenetic modifiers.
    • If the strain's ecology suggests interactions, employ co-cultivation with suspected partner microbes.
  • Metabolite Correlation and Compound Isolation: Use High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry (HRMS) and molecular networking (e.g., via the Global Natural Products Social Molecular Networking platform) to correlate changes in metabolite production with specific cultivation conditions. This helps prioritize extracts for fractionation and isolation of novel compounds [2] [41].
  • Structure Elucidation and Bioactivity Testing: Purify induced metabolites using techniques like preparative HPLC. Determine their structures using NMR spectroscopy and HRMS. Finally, evaluate their biological activities (e.g., antimicrobial, anticancer, antifungal) in relevant assays [26].

The strategic activation of silent biosynthetic gene clusters is a cornerstone of modern natural product discovery. The OSMAC approach, co-cultivation, and epigenetic manipulation provide a robust, accessible, and highly effective toolkit for researchers to translate genomic data into chemical reality. By systematically applying these protocols within a genome-mining framework, scientists can significantly enhance the throughput and success of their discovery pipelines, unlocking novel chemical scaffolds with the potential to become the next generation of therapeutic agents.

A vast reservoir of microbial natural products (NPs) with potential therapeutic applications remains untapped because the majority of environmental microorganisms resist cultivation under standard laboratory conditions [44] [2]. This "microbial dark matter" represents an immense source of novel biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) encoding pathways for antibiotics, anticancer agents, and other bioactive compounds [45] [2]. Even for cultivable strains, many BGCs are "silent" or "cryptic," meaning they are not expressed in vitro, further complicating discovery efforts [2].

Heterologous expression has emerged as a powerful strategy to circumvent these cultivation barriers. This approach involves cloning BGCs from a native, difficult-to-manipulate organism and transferring them into a well-characterized, genetically tractable heterologous host for expression and production [46]. This protocol details the application of heterologous expression within a genome mining workflow, enabling researchers to access the chemical diversity encoded by uncultivable microbes and silent genetic elements.

The Microbial Heterologous Expression Platform (Micro-HEP) provides an integrated system for the modification, transfer, and expression of BGCs in a controlled host environment [46]. Its core components are designed for high efficiency and stability, particularly with large and complex gene clusters.

Key Components of the Micro-HEP System

Table 1: Core Components of the Heterologous Expression Platform

Component	Description	Function in the Platform
Bifunctional E. coli Strains	Engineered E. coli strains (e.g., GB2005, GB2006) capable of both DNA modification and conjugation.	Serves as a genetic "workhorse" for cloning and modifying BGCs before transfer to the final host.
Optimized Chassis Strain	S. coelicolor A3(2)-2023 with four endogenous BGCs deleted and multiple genomic "landing pads" integrated.	Provides a clean, defined metabolic background for heterologous expression, reducing native interference.
Modular RMCE Cassettes	DNA cassettes containing orthogonal recombination systems (Cre-lox, Vika-vox, Dre-rox, phiBT1-attP).	Enables stable, site-specific, and potentially multi-copy integration of the BGC into the host chromosome.
Conjugation System	A rhamnose-inducible Redαβγ recombination system and efficient Tra protein machinery for DNA transfer.	Facilitates precise genetic engineering in E. coli and subsequent mobilization of the BGC into the Streptomyces host.

Workflow Logic and Pathway

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow of the Micro-HEP system, from BGC capture to compound production.

Detailed Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: BGC Capture and Engineering in a BifunctionalE. coliStrain

This protocol describes the process of isolating a BGC from its native genomic DNA and engineering it for conjugation and integration.

Materials & Reagents:

• BGC Source: Genomic DNA from the target microbial strain.
• Cloning Host: Bifunctional E. coli strain (e.g., GB2005).
• Recombineering Plasmid: pSC101-PRha-αβγA-PBAD-ccdA (temperature-sensitive, rhamnose- and arabinose-inducible).
• Cloning Vector: A suitable vector for capturing large DNA fragments (e.g., a BAC vector).
• Culture Media: Luria-Bertani (LB) medium with appropriate antibiotics.
• Inducers: 10% L-rhamnose, 10% L-arabinose.

Procedure:

• BGC Capture: Capture the target BGC from the genomic DNA using a method such as Transformation-Associated Recombination (TAR) cloning or ExoCET, and clone it into the vector in a standard E. coli strain like DH5α [46].
• Host Preparation: Electroporate the recombineering plasmid pSC101-PRha-αβγA-PBAD-ccdA into the bifunctional E. coli strain GB2005. Grow the transformed strain at 30°C in LB medium with appropriate antibiotics.
• RMCE Cassette Assembly: Construct a modular RMCE cassette containing, at a minimum: an origin of transfer (oriT), a selectable marker, and the recombination target sites (RTS) compatible with the chosen system in the chassis (e.g., loxP, vox, rox).
• Two-Step Recombineering:
  • First Recombination: Induce the GB2005 strain containing the BGC vector with 10% L-rhamnose and 10% L-arabinose to express the Redαβγ recombinase and the CcdA anti-toxin. Electroporate a linear DNA fragment containing the RMCE cassette flanked by homology arms targeting the BGC vector. This replaces a specific region of the BGC vector with the RMCE cassette. Select for clones with the integrated cassette.
  • Second Recombination (Marker Excision): Induce the strain again to promote a second recombination event that excises the selectable marker (e.g., an amp-ccdB or kan-rpsL cassette), resulting in a markerless, modified BGC vector ready for conjugation [46].

Protocol 2: Conjugative Transfer and RMCE inStreptomyces

This protocol covers the transfer of the engineered BGC from E. coli to the Streptomyces chassis and its stable genomic integration.

Materials & Reagents:

• Donor: E. coli GB2005 containing the engineered BGC plasmid with oriT.
• Recipient: S. coelicolor A3(2)-2023 chassis strain.
• Culture Media: LB medium (for E. coli); Modified Soybean-Mannitol (MS) medium (for Streptomyces).
• Antibiotics: Appropriate for counter-selection against the E. coli donor post-conjugation.

Procedure:

• Conjugation Preparation:
  • Grow the E. coli donor strain in LB to mid-exponential phase.
  • Harvest S. coelicolor spores or mycelium and treat if necessary to weaken any restriction-modification barriers that might degrade incoming foreign DNA [47].
• Biparental Conjugation:
  • Mix the E. coli donor and Streptomyces recipient cells.
  • Pellet the mixed culture, resuspend, and spot the mixture onto an MS plate.
  • Incubate at 30°C for a defined period (e.g., 16-20 hours) to allow conjugation.
  • Overlay the plate with an appropriate antibiotic and an agent to counter-select the E. coli donor (e.g., nalidixic acid). Incubate until Streptomyces exconjugants appear [46].
• RMCE Integration:
  • The BGC plasmid is mobilized as single-stranded DNA from E. coli to Streptomyces via the Tra machinery.
  • Inside the chassis strain, the cognate site-specific recombinase (e.g., Cre, Vika, Dre) is expressed.
  • The recombinase catalyzes a double-crossover event between the RTS on the plasmid and the matching pre-engineered RTS in the chromosome of S. coelicolor A3(2)-2023.
  • This RMCE process cleanly integrates the BGC into the host genome without inserting the plasmid backbone, which can cause instability [46].
• Strain Validation: Verify successful integration by PCR and antibiotic sensitivity screening.

Protocol 3: Heterologous Production and Analysis

This protocol covers the fermentation and analytical processes to confirm the production of the target natural product.

Materials & Reagents:

• Fermentation Media: Use defined media such as GYM or M1 medium, depending on the target compound [46].
• Extraction Solvents: Ethyl acetate, methanol, or other suitable organic solvents.
• Analytical Standards: For the target compound, if available.
• Analytical Instruments: HPLC-MS/MS, NMR.

Procedure:

• Fermentation: Inoculate the validated exconjugant strain into an appropriate production medium (e.g., GYM for xiamenmycin, M1 for griseorhodin). Incubate with shaking at 30°C for a specified period (e.g., 5-7 days) [46].
• Metabolite Extraction: After fermentation, separate the broth and mycelia by centrifugation. Extract the supernatant with an equal volume of ethyl acetate, and the mycelial pellet with methanol. Combine and concentrate the organic extracts.
• Compound Analysis:
  • LC-MS/MS Analysis: Re-dissolve the extract and analyze by Liquid Chromatography tandem Mass Spectrometry. Use High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry (HRMS) to identify the molecular formula of produced compounds.
  • Comparative Metabolomics: Compare the metabolic profile of the engineered chassis to that of the wild-type chassis and the native producer (if available). Tools like the Global Natural Products Social Molecular Networking (GNPS) platform can help identify novel compounds related to known molecular families [45] [2].
  • Structure Elucidation: Purify the target compound using preparative HPLC or other chromatographic methods. Use NMR spectroscopy (e.g., 1H, 13C, COSY, HSQC) to fully elucidate the compound's structure [45].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 2: Key Research Reagents for Heterologous Expression

Reagent / Tool	Specific Example	Function / Application
Bioinformatics Tools	antiSMASH, DeepBGC, PRISM	In silico identification and prediction of BGCs from genomic data [45] [2].
Cloning Systems	TAR, ExoCET	Capture of large, full-length BGCs directly from genomic DNA [46].
Recombineering System	λ-Red (Redα/Redβ/Redγ), induced by rhamnose	Enables precise genetic engineering in E. coli using short homology arms [46].
Orthogonal Recombinases	Cre, Vika, Dre, PhiC31	Facilitates stable, site-specific integration of BGCs into the host chromosome via RMCE [46].
Chassis Strains	S. coelicolor A3(2)-2023 (BGC-deleted)	Optimized heterologous host with reduced metabolic burden and pre-defined integration sites [46].
Analytical Platforms	HRMS (Orbitrap, FT-ICR), Cryogenic NMR	High-sensitivity detection and structural elucidation of newly produced natural products [45].
Avenanthramide-C methyl ester	Avenanthramide-C methyl ester, MF:C17H15NO6, MW:329.30 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
Adenoregulin	Adenoregulin, CAS:149260-68-4, MF:C142H242N40O42, MW:3181.7 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

Technical Considerations and Optimization

Successful implementation of this platform requires attention to several technical aspects. A major barrier to DNA delivery is the host's Restriction-Modification (R-M) systems, which degrade foreign DNA. Our computational analysis reveals a diverse array of R-M systems in probiotic and environmental bacteria [47]. Strategies to overcome this include:

• In vitro methylation of plasmid DNA using methylases that mimic the host's pattern.
• Transiently inactivating R-M systems via heat shock before conjugation.
• Using engineered E. coli donors that express the host's methyltransferases to pre-modify the DNA [47].

Furthermore, BGC copy number can significantly impact yield. The Micro-HEP platform allows for the integration of multiple copies of a BGC. For example, integrating 2 to 4 copies of the xiamenmycin (xim) BGC led to a corresponding increase in production titers [46]. The choice of a clean chassis like S. coelicolor A3(2)-2023 minimizes the background metabolic noise, facilitating the detection and characterization of novel compounds from cryptic BGCs.

The escalating crisis of antimicrobial resistance demands innovative strategies for drug discovery. Synthetic-bioinformatic natural products (syn-BNPs) represent a paradigm shift, moving from traditional culture-based natural product isolation to a targeted, in silico-guided approach [48]. This method leverages the vast and growing repository of genomic data to access the untapped reservoir of bioactive compounds, particularly from unculturable organisms or silent biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) [49] [33]. The core premise of the syn-BNP approach is not necessarily to create exact replicas of natural products, but to efficiently generate libraries of biomimetic natural product congeners that are enriched for evolutionarily selected biological activities [49]. This strategy has successfully identified compounds with a range of bioactivities, including antibacterial, antifungal, and anticancer properties [48] [50], showcasing its potential to repopulate and diversify drug discovery pipelines with evolutionarily inspired molecules.

Bioinformatics Workflow: From Gene Cluster to Predicted Structure

The initial and most critical phase of the syn-BNP pipeline is the accurate bioinformatic prediction of the peptide structure encoded by a nonribosomal peptide synthetase (NRPS) gene cluster.

Essential NRPS Domains and Specificity Prediction

NRPSs are multimodular enzyme complexes where each module is responsible for incorporating a single amino acid building block into the growing peptide chain [48]. The accurate prediction of the final peptide structure hinges on understanding the function of core and auxiliary domains:

• Adenylation (A) Domain: Selects and activates the specific amino acid substrate.
• Thiolation (T) Domain: Carries the activated amino acid and the growing peptide chain via a phosphopantetheinyl arm.
• Condensation (C) Domain: Catalyzes the formation of the peptide bond between adjacent modules [48].
• Auxiliary Domains: Introduce further structural complexity and include:
  • Epimerization (E) Domain: Converts L-amino acids to their D-configuration.
  • Methylation (M) Domain: Catalyzes N-methylation of amino acids.
  • Heterocyclization (Cy) Domain: Forms thiazoline or oxazoline rings from Cys/Ser/Thr residues.
  • Thioesterase (TE) Domain: Releases the full-length peptide from the assembly line, often catalyzing cyclization [48].

A domain specificity is primarily predicted using the physicochemical properties of 10 critical active site residues (positions 235, 236, 239, 278, 299, 301, 322, 330, 331, and 517) first identified by Stachelhaus and colleagues [48]. The table below summarizes the key bioinformatic tools that automate this prediction process and analyze BGCs.

Table 1: Key Bioinformatics Tools for Syn-BNP Discovery

Tool Name	Primary Function in Syn-BNP	Key Features
antiSMASH [48]	BGC identification & analysis	Identifies BGCs in genomic data; predicts core biosynthetic machinery and tailoring enzymes.
PRISM [48]	NRP structure prediction	Predicts peptide sequences and modifications like cyclization, methylation, and heterocycle formation.
NRPSPredictor2 [48]	A-domain specificity	Employs machine learning (profile HMMs) to predict the amino acid activated by an A-domain.
SANDPUMA [48]	A-domain specificity	A machine learning tool for predicting A-domain specificities.
Norine [48]	NRP database	A repository of known nonribosomal peptides for dereplication.
ARTS [51]	BGC prioritization	Identifies BGCs with self-resistance genes, prioritizing those likely to encode bioactive compounds.

Workflow Visualization

The following diagram illustrates the integrated bioinformatics and chemical synthesis pipeline for syn-BNP discovery.

Chemical Synthesis & Experimental Protocols

The transition from an in silico prediction to a tangible compound library is achieved through chemical synthesis, which offers scalability and bypasses the challenges of microbial cultivation and BGC expression.

Representative Protocol: Synthesis of Bioactive Cyclic Peptides

The following protocol is adapted from a study that discovered nine new syn-BNP cyclic peptide antibiotics (SyCPAs) with activity against ESKAPE pathogens and Mycobacterium tuberculosis [49].

Objective: To synthesize a library of syn-BNP cyclic peptides inspired by NRPS BGCs for antibacterial screening.

Materials and Reagents: Table 2: Key Research Reagents for Syn-BNP Cyclic Peptide Synthesis

Reagent / Material	Function / Explanation	Supplier Examples
2-Chlorotrityl Chloride Resin	Solid support for Fmoc-SPPS; prevents diketopiperazine formation.	Matrix Innovation, Inc.
Fmoc-Protected Amino Acids	Building blocks for peptide assembly, including non-proteinogenic types.	Chem-Impex International, P3 BioSystems
Coupling Reagents (e.g., PyAOP, HATU)	Activates carboxyl group for amide bond formation.	P3 BioSystems
(D/L)-N-Fmoc-3-aminotetradecanoic acid	Synthetic surrogate for fatty acid incorporation (e.g., in N-acylated peptides).	Chemieliva Pharmaceutical Co.
Pd(PPh₃)₄	Catalyst for selective removal of Alloc protecting groups.	Sigma-Aldrich
Solid-Phase Extraction (SPE) C-18 Cartridges	For rapid parallel purification of crude peptides post-cyclization.	Sigma-Aldrich

Methodology:

• Solid-Phase Peptide Synthesis (SPPS):

  • Perform standard Fmoc-based SPPS on 2-chlorotrityl chloride resin.
  • Use synthetic building blocks to mimic complex natural product features:
    • Replace Ser/Thr with 2,3-diaminopropionic acid (Dap) to provide a more reactive nitrogen nucleophile for side-chain-to-side-chain cyclization.
    • Protect nucleophilic side-chain amines (e.g., on Dap, Orn, Lys) with an allyloxycarbonyl (Alloc) group for orthogonal deprotection.
    • Incorporate N-Fmoc-3-aminotetradecanoic acid as a synthetic surrogate for fatty acid attachment in lipopeptide designs [49].

• Cyclization and Cleavage:

  • Cleave the linear peptide from the resin under mild acidic conditions (e.g., 1-2% TFA in DCM) to preserve side-chain protecting groups.
  • For head-to-tail cyclization, dissolve the crude linear peptide in dilute solution (~1 mM) in DMF or DCM.
  • Use coupling reagents like PyAOP and bases like DIPEA to facilitate macrocyclization.
  • For side-chain cyclization, first remove the Alloc protecting groups selectively using Pd(PPh₃)â‚„ and a nucleophile like phenylsilane in DCM, then proceed with cyclization [49].

• Global Deprotection and Purification:

  • Remove all remaining acid-labile side-chain protecting groups (e.g., Boc, tBu) by treating the cyclized peptide with a strong TFA cocktail (e.g., TFA/Hâ‚‚O/triisopropylsilane, 95:2.5:2.5) for 2 hours at room temperature.
  • For primary screening, purify crude peptides in parallel using C18 solid-phase extraction (SPE) cartridges on a vacuum manifold.
  • For hit validation, purify active compounds via preparative reversed-phase HPLC (e.g., using a C18 column with water/acetonitrile gradient and 0.1% formic acid) [49].

Synthesis Workflow Visualization

The chemical synthesis process for generating syn-BNP cyclic peptides is detailed below.

Application Notes & Case Studies

Discovery of Novel Antibiotics

A landmark syn-BNP study designed, synthesized, and screened 157 cyclic peptides inspired by 96 bacterial NRPS BGCs [49]. This effort yielded nine new antibiotics (SyCPAs) with the following key characteristics:

• Activity Profile: Effective against drug-resistant ESKAPE pathogens and Mycobacterium tuberculosis.
• Resistance Development: Notably, target pathogens were unable to develop significant resistance to several of these SyCPAs in laboratory experiments.
• Diverse Mechanisms of Action: Characterized modes included bacterial cell lysis, membrane depolarization, inhibition of cell wall biosynthesis, and dysregulation of the ClpP protease [49]. This demonstrates the power of the syn-BNP approach to uncover compounds with diverse and potentially novel mechanisms.

Prioritization Using Self-Resistance Genes

A key challenge is prioritizing which BGCs to target from thousands of possibilities. An effective strategy involves using self-resistance genes as a bioactivity filter [51]. Microorganisms often encode resistance mechanisms (e.g., specialized transporters or drug-modifying enzymes) within the BGC itself to protect against their own bioactive metabolites. Tools like the Antibiotic Resistant Target Seeker (ARTS) can identify these genes in BGCs, prioritizing clusters that are more likely to produce compounds with antibacterial activity [51]. This strategy was integrated into the FAST-NPS automated platform, which achieved a 100% success rate in discovering bioactive compounds from prioritized BGCs in Streptomyces [51].

The Scientist's Toolkit

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Syn-BNP Workflows

Category	Item	Function in Syn-BNP Pipeline
Bioinformatics	antiSMASH Software	The cornerstone tool for identifying and annotating BGCs in genomic data [48].
	NRPSPredictor2 / SANDPUMA	Predicts A-domain specificity, determining the amino acid sequence of the NRP [48].
Chemical Synthesis	Fmoc-Amino Acid Building Blocks	Core components for solid-phase synthesis; includes proteinogenic and non-proteinogenic types.
	Specialized Building Blocks (e.g., N-Fmoc-3-aminotetradecanoic acid)	Mimic complex natural product structures, such as N-terminal fatty acid chains [49].
	Orthogonal Protecting Groups (Alloc)	Enables complex cyclization strategies by allowing selective deprotection [49].
Purification & Analysis	C18 Solid-Phase Extraction (SPE) Cartridges	Enables medium-throughput, parallel purification of synthetic peptide libraries for primary screening [49].
	Preparative Reversed-Phase HPLC	Essential for purifying milligram-to-gram quantities of active hit compounds for detailed validation.
Biological Screening	ESKAPE Pathogen Panel	Standard set of clinically relevant, often multidrug-resistant bacterial strains for antibiotic discovery [49].
	Cell Viability Assays (e.g., MTT)	Used for cytotoxicity profiling and anticancer activity screening [49] [50].
D-Allose	D-Allose, CAS:2595-97-3, MF:C6H12O6, MW:180.16 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

Fungal-derived natural products are an invaluable resource for drug discovery, yet a significant challenge persists: under standard laboratory conditions, fungi predominantly produce a limited and repetitive set of well-characterized metabolites [26]. This constraint severely hinders the discovery of novel bioactive compounds. Advances in genome sequencing have revealed that fungi possess a vast, untapped potential encoded in biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs), many of which remain "silent" or unexpressed under conventional cultivation parameters [26] [52].

This Application Note details a targeted case study integrating genome mining with the One-Strain-Many-Compounds (OSMAC) approach to unlock the chemical diversity of the endophytic fungus Diaporthe kyushuensis ZMU-48-1. The study successfully led to the discovery of novel antifungal pyrrole derivatives, demonstrating a powerful workflow for natural product discovery [26] [53].

Genome Mining & BGC Identification

The initial phase involved a comprehensive genomic analysis of D. kyushuensis ZMU-48-1 to assess its biosynthetic potential.

Experimental Protocol: Genome Sequencing and BGC Prediction

• Fungal Material: The strain Diaporthe kyushuensis ZMU-48-1 was isolated from decayed leaves of Acacia confusa Merr. and preserved for further study [26].
• DNA Extraction: Mycelium from a 6-day-old culture in Potato Dextrose Broth (PDB) was harvested. Genomic DNA was extracted using a standard protocol involving grinding in liquid nitrogen, digestion with a buffer and β-mercaptoethanol, RNase A treatment, and purification with chloroform extraction [26].
• Whole-Genome Sequencing: Sequencing was performed by a commercial service provider (Sangon Biotech Co., Ltd., Shanghai) [26].
• BGC Identification: The sequenced genome was analyzed using antiSMASH (antibiotics & Secondary Metabolite Analysis Shell), a standard bioinformatics tool for the automated identification of biosynthetic gene clusters across the genome [26] [53].

Key Findings from Genome Mining

The genomic analysis revealed a remarkable biosynthetic capacity. Table: Biosynthetic Gene Clusters Identified in D. kyushuensis ZMU-48-1

Analysis Type	Tool/Method Used	Key Finding	Implication
Whole-Genome Sequencing	Sangon Biotech Service	Full genome sequence	Foundation for BGC analysis [26]
BGC Identification	antiSMASH	98 putative BGCs identified	Indicates high biosynthetic potential [26] [53]
Cluster Homology Analysis	antiSMASH / NCBI Comparison	~60% of BGCs show no significant homology to known clusters	Highlights potential for novel compound discovery [26]

This genomic evidence confirmed that D. kyushuensis ZMU-48-1 is a promising source of novel chemistry, with the majority of its BGCs being "cryptic" and not expressed under standard conditions [26].

OSMAC Strategy & Metabolite Diversification

The OSMAC approach was employed to activate the cryptic BGCs identified through genome mining. This strategy systematically alters cultivation parameters to perturb the fungus's physiological state and trigger the expression of silent gene clusters [26] [39].

Experimental Protocol: OSMAC Cultivation

• Base Media Preparation: Prepare multiple flasks of Potato Dextrose Broth (PDB) and portions of rice solid medium [26].
• Culture Perturbation:
  • Supplement one set of PDB flasks with 3% (w/v) Sodium Bromide (NaBr).
  • Supplement another set of PDB flasks with 3% (w/v) sea salt.
  • Maintain a control set of PDB and rice medium with no supplements [26].
• Inoculation and Fermentation: Inoculate all media with the fungus and incubate at 28°C with agitation (for liquid cultures) for a defined period [26].
• Metabolite Extraction: After fermentation, extract the secondary metabolites from the culture broth and/or mycelia using organic solvents such as ethyl acetate or methanol. Combine extracts and concentrate under reduced pressure [26].

Key Findings from OSMAC Cultivation

The modification of culture conditions successfully altered the metabolic profile of the fungus. Table: OSMAC Culture Conditions and Their Efficacy in Metabolite Diversification

Culture Condition	Key Parameter Variation	Efficacy for Metabolite Production
PDB (Control)	Standard laboratory medium	Baseline production of metabolites [26]
PDB + 3% NaBr	Halogen salt supplement	Optimal for increasing metabolite diversity [26]
PDB + 3% Sea Salt	Complex ion supplement	Optimal for increasing metabolite diversity [26]
Rice Solid Medium	Solid substrate, different nutrients	Optimal for increasing metabolite diversity [26]

Compound Isolation & Antifungal Assessment

Large-scale fermentation under the optimal OSMAC conditions, followed by bioactivity-guided fractionation, led to the isolation and identification of novel and known compounds.

Experimental Protocol: Compound Isolation and Characterization

• Large-Scale Fermentation: Scale up the cultivation of D. kyushuensis in the most productive OSMAC conditions (PDB with 3% NaBr, PDB with 3% sea salt, and rice medium) [26].
• Chromatographic Separation: The crude extract is subjected to a series of purification steps:
  • Fractionation: Use vacuum liquid chromatography (VLC) or open column chromatography (CC) on silica gel with gradients of petroleum ether/ethyl acetate to separate compounds based on polarity [26].
  • Purification: Further purify active fractions using preparative High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) with reversed-phase columns (e.g., C18) [26].
• Structural Elucidation:
  • High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry (HR-ESI-MS): Determine the accurate molecular mass and formula [26].
  • Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) Spectroscopy: Use 1D and 2D NMR experiments (e.g., ¹H, ¹³C, COSY, HSQC, HMBC) on a spectrometer (e.g., Bruker AVANCE III 600 MHz) to determine the planar and stereochemical structure [26].
• Antifungal Assay:
  • Test Organisms: Use phytopathogenic fungi such as Bipolaris sorokiniana and Botryosphaeria dothidea [26].
  • Method: Employ a microbroth dilution method to determine the Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) of the purified compounds [26].
  • Analysis: Measure MIC values after a specified incubation period to quantify antifungal potency [26].

Key Findings: Isolated Compounds and Antifungal Activity

The integrated approach yielded a diverse set of compounds with significant biological activity. Table: Antifungal Activity of Selected Compounds Isolated from D. kyushuensis

Compound	Identification	Antifungal Activity & Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC)
Kyushuenine A (1)	Novel pyrrole derivative	Activity not specified in abstract [26]
Kyushuenine B (2)	Novel pyrrole derivative	Activity not specified in abstract [26]
Compound 8	Known secondary metabolite	Active against Bipolaris sorokiniana (MIC = 200 μg/mL) [26]
Compound 18	Known secondary metabolite	Potent inhibition of Botryosphaeria dothidea (MIC = 50 μg/mL) [26]

In total, the study isolated 18 structurally diverse compounds, including the two novel pyrrole derivatives, kyushuenines A and B, alongside 16 known metabolites [26] [53].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table: Essential Reagents and Materials for Genome Mining & OSMAC-based Discovery

Item/Category	Specific Example(s)	Function/Application
Culture Media	Potato Dextrose Broth (PDB), Rice solid medium	Base for fungal cultivation and biomass production [26]
Chemical Elicitors	Sodium Bromide (NaBr), Sea Salt	Elicitors to perturb metabolism and activate silent BGCs [26]
Chromatography Media	Silica gel (300-400 mesh), C18 reversed-phase silica	Stationary phases for column chromatography and HPLC purification [26]
Solvents	Methanol, Acetonitrile (HPLC grade), Ethyl Acetate, Deuterated solvents (CDCl₃, CD₃OD, DMSO-d₆)	Extraction, chromatography, and NMR spectroscopy [26]
Bioinformatics Tools	antiSMASH software	In silico identification and analysis of Biosynthetic Gene Clusters [26]
Analytical Instrumentation	Bruker AVANCE III NMR, HR-ESI-MS, Preparative HPLC	Structural elucidation and compound purification [26]

Integrated Workflow Diagram

The following diagram illustrates the comprehensive, iterative pipeline from genomic discovery to bioactive compound identification.

This case study demonstrates the powerful synergy of genome mining and the OSMAC strategy for modern natural product discovery. By computationally predicting the biosynthetic potential of Diaporthe kyushuensis and then experimentally activating its cryptic pathways, researchers successfully accessed its hidden chemical diversity. The isolation of novel pyrrole derivatives, alongside compounds with potent antifungal activity against phytopathogens, validates this integrated approach as a robust pipeline for generating new lead compounds for agricultural and pharmaceutical development. This workflow provides a reproducible template for unlocking the vast, untapped potential of fungal and other microbial resources.

Navigating Challenges: Optimization Strategies for Efficient Discovery

Prioritization Frameworks for Evaluating Promising BGCs

The rapid expansion of genomic sequencing has revealed a vast reservoir of biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) in bacterial genomes, with less than 0.25% of identified BGCs experimentally correlated to known natural products [54]. This disparity creates a critical bottleneck in natural product discovery: with millions of uncharacterized BGCs available, researchers require sophisticated prioritization frameworks to identify clusters most likely to encode novel bioactive compounds [55] [2]. Effective prioritization strategies have evolved beyond simple sequence similarity searches to incorporate multidimensional data on resistance mechanisms, regulatory networks, and chemical structural features [56] [2]. This application note provides detailed protocols for implementing three principal BGC prioritization frameworks—resistance-gene-guided mining, regulatory network analysis, and bioactive feature targeting—enabling researchers to systematically evaluate and select promising BGCs for experimental characterization.

BGC Prioritization Frameworks: Principles and Quantitative Comparisons

Prioritization Framework	Underlying Principle	Primary Applications	Key Advantages	Inherent Limitations
Resistance-Gene-Guided	Self-resistance genes within BGCs indicate bioactivity against specific cellular targets [57] [2]	Targeted antibiotic discovery; Mode-of-action prediction [57]	Directly links BGC to potential bioactivity and cellular target; Reduces rediscovery rates [2]	Limited to BGCs with co-localized resistance genes; May miss novel mechanisms [57]
Regulatory Network Analysis	Identifies transcription factor binding sites (TFBS) controlling BGC expression [58]	Activation of silent/cryptic BGCs; Prediction of elicitors for BGC expression [58] [55]	Enables rational activation of silent clusters; Predicts environmental/growth conditions for production [58]	TFBS in BGCs often degenerate and difficult to detect; Limited knowledge of specialized regulators [58]
Bioactive Feature Targeting	Targets enzymes installing specific chemical moieties with known bioactivity [56]	Discovery of compounds with specific reactive groups or ligand-binding features [56]	Direct connection between genetic signature and chemical feature; Enables scaffold-focused discovery [56]	Requires prior knowledge of biosynthetic enzymes; Limited to predictable structural features [56]

Performance Metrics and Representative Case Studies

Framework	Success Rate (Representative Studies)	Novel Compounds Discovered	Time to Compound Identification	Computational Resource Requirements
Resistance-Gene-Guided	High (≥70% of prioritized clusters yielded novel bioactive compounds in multiple studies) [57] [2]	Pyxidicyclines [57] [2]; Thiotetroamide [57]; Aspterric acid [57] [2]	Medium (2-6 months for heterologous expression and structure elucidation) [57]	Medium (genome mining + resistance gene identification)
Regulatory Network Analysis	Medium (dependent on accurate TFBS prediction) [58]	Novel lanthipeptides (class V) via decRiPPter [55]	Long (3-9 months including regulatory decryption and activation) [58] [55]	High (requires integration of multiple omics datasets)
Bioactive Feature Targeting	High for targeted features (≥80% success for enediyne, β-lactone warheads) [56]	New enediynes [56]; β-lactone-containing proteasome inhibitors [56]	Short (1-3 months for targeted isolation once feature detected) [56]	Low to Medium (dependent on feature complexity)

Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Resistance-Gene-Guided BGC Prioritization

Principle: Identify BGCs containing self-resistance genes that protect the producer organism from its own bioactive compound [57] [2].

Materials:

• Genomic datasets (NCBI, IMG-ABC, antiSMASH DB)
• Resistance gene databases (CARD, MIBiG)
• Bioinformatics tools (antiSMASH, HMMER, BLAST)
• Heterologous expression system (e.g., Streptomyces spp.)

Procedure:

• Dataset Curation and BGC Identification

  • Collect genomic sequences of target bacteria (e.g., Actinobacteria) from NCBI or other repositories [57]
  • Perform initial BGC identification using antiSMASH with default parameters [57]
  • Export all predicted BGCs in GenBank format for further analysis

• Resistance Gene Identification

  • Compile reference resistance genes from characterized BGCs in MIBiG database [57]
  • Use HMMER to search for homologs of target resistance genes (e.g., pentapeptide repeat proteins for topoisomerase inhibitors, DHAD for herbicides) within predicted BGCs [57] [2]
  • Apply inclusion threshold of E-value < 1e-10 and sequence identity > 30%

• BGC Prioritization and Validation

  • Prioritize BGCs containing both core biosynthetic genes and cognate resistance genes
  • Compare prioritized BGCs against MIBiG to assess novelty using ClusterBlast [57]
  • Select top 3-5 BGCs for heterologous expression in suitable host (e.g., S. coelicolor or S. albus)
  • Screen extracts for bioactivity against target organisms (e.g., MRSA for antibiotics) [2]

Troubleshooting:

• Low resistance gene detection: Adjust HMMER thresholds or use position-specific iterative BLAST (PSI-BLAST)
• No expression in heterologous host: Verify promoter recognition and codon usage compatibility

Protocol 2: Regulatory Network-Based BGC Prioritization Using COMMBAT

Principle: Identify transcription factor binding sites (TFBS) within BGCs to predict regulatory networks and potential elicitors for silent clusters [58].

Materials:

• Bacterial genomes with annotated BGCs
• COMMBAT web server (https://commbat.uliege.be)
• Position Weight Matrices (PWMs) for relevant transcription factors
• RNA extraction kit and RNA-seq facilities

Procedure:

• Data Preparation

  • Compile genomic sequences of target BGCs with 2-5 kb flanking regions
  • Annotate genes within BGCs using RAST or Prokka
  • Categorize genes as regulatory, core biosynthetic, transport, or resistance based on annotation

• TFBS Prediction with COMMBAT

  • Input BGC sequences into COMMBAT web server [58]
  • Select relevant transcription factors based on bacterial taxonomy (e.g., AdpA, AfsQ1 for Actinobacteria)
  • Run analysis with default parameters: interaction score (PWM-based), region score (promoter proximity), function score (gene importance)
  • Export COMMBAT scores for all predicted TFBS

• Regulatory Network Reconstruction

  • Prioritize TFBS with COMMBAT scores >0.7 (high confidence) [58]
  • Map TFBS to promoter regions of core biosynthetic genes
  • Construct regulatory network linking TFs to target BGC genes
  • Predict potential elicitors based on known TF regulators (e.g., iron limitation for DmdR1 targets) [55]

• Experimental Validation

  • Grow producing organism under predicted eliciting conditions
  • Monitor BGC expression via RT-qPCR of core biosynthetic genes
  • Perform metabolomic analysis (LC-MS) to detect compound production

Troubleshooting:

• Low COMMBAT scores: Check TF selection or extend flanking regions
• No expression under predicted conditions: Test multiple growth conditions or consider combinatorial regulation

Protocol 3: Bioactive Feature-Targeted BGC Prioritization

Principle: Target BGCs encoding enzymes that install specific bioactive chemical features (e.g., warheads, metal-chelating groups) [56].

Materials:

• Genomic databases (NCBI, JGI IMG)
• Feature-specific hidden Markov models (HMMs)
• Chemical synthesis facilities
• Bioassay systems for target activity

Procedure:

• Bioactive Feature Selection

  • Select target bioactive feature based on desired activity (e.g., enediyne for DNA damage, β-lactone for protease inhibition) [56]
  • Identify key biosynthetic enzymes installing feature from characterized systems (e.g., PKSE for enediynes, β-lactone synthetases)

• Genome Mining for Feature-Associated Enzymes

  • Compile HMM profiles for target enzymes from Pfam or custom alignments
  • Search genomic databases using HMMER with cutoff E-value < 1e-15
  • Extract genomic context of significant hits (≥10 kb flanking)

• BGC Assessment and Prioritization

  • Analyze genomic context using antiSMASH to identify complete BGCs
  • Exclude BGCs with high similarity to characterized clusters via MIBiG BLAST [56]
  • Prioritize BGCs based on: (1) completeness of biosynthetic machinery, (2) presence of tailoring enzymes suggesting chemical novelty, (3) phylogenetic distinctness from characterized systems

• Compound Access and Validation

  • Heterologously express prioritized BGCs in suitable host
  • Alternatively, predict chemical structure and synthesize proposed compound (syn-BNP approach) [2]
  • Validate bioactivity through target-specific assays (e.g., proteasome inhibition for epoxyketones)

Troubleshooting:

• Incomplete BGCs: Check assembly quality or seek complete genomes of related strains
• Discrepancy between predicted and actual structure: Account for non-collinear biosynthesis or unpredicted tailoring

Visualization of BGC Prioritization Workflows

Integrated BGC Prioritization Framework

Integrated BGC Prioritization Workflow: This diagram illustrates the convergent strategy for BGC prioritization, beginning with genomic data collection and BGC identification, then proceeding through three orthogonal prioritization frameworks, and culminating in integrated analysis and experimental validation.

Resistance-Gene-Guided Mining Pathway

Resistance-Gene-Guided Mining Pathway: This specialized workflow details the process of identifying BGCs containing self-resistance genes, analyzing their co-localization with biosynthetic genes, assessing novelty, and predicting mode of action before experimental validation.

Computational Tools and Databases for BGC Prioritization

Resource Name	Type	Primary Function	Access	Application Context
antiSMASH [54] [57]	Software Pipeline	BGC identification and initial classification	Web server/Command line	Initial BGC detection across all frameworks
MIBiG [54] [57]	Curated Database	Repository of characterized BGCs	Public web access	Dereplication and novelty assessment
COMMBAT [58]	Web Tool	Prediction of transcription factor binding sites in BGCs	https://commbat.uliege.be	Regulatory network analysis framework
GATOR-GC [4]	Software Tool	Targeted BGC discovery with customizable search criteria	Command line	Bioactive feature targeting and family-specific mining
PRISM [57]	Software Pipeline	BGC detection with bioactivity prediction	Web server/Command line	Bioactive feature targeting and mode-of-action prediction
BiG-SCAPE [54]	Analysis Tool	BGC family classification and network analysis	Command line	Novelty assessment and BGC diversity analysis
DECRiPPter [55]	Machine Learning Tool	Identification of novel RiPP classes	Command line	Discovery of novel biosynthetic classes via AI

Experimental Materials for BGC Validation

Reagent/Resource	Specifications	Supplier Examples	Application
Heterologous Expression Hosts	Streptomyces coelicolor M1152/M1154, S. albus	DSMZ, ATCC	BGC expression in clean genetic background
Broad-Host-Range Vectors	pSET152, pRMS, cosmid libraries	Addgene, academic labs	BGC cloning and transfer
RNA Extraction Kit	Enzymatic lysis optimized for GC-rich Actinobacteria	Qiagen, Macherey-Nagel	Transcriptional analysis of BGC expression
LC-HRMS System	High-resolution mass spectrometer with UPLC	Thermo Fisher, Agilent, Bruker	Metabolite detection and characterization
Transcription Factor Library	Purified bacterial TFs for DAP-seq	Custom production	Regulatory network mapping

The prioritization of BGCs represents a critical juncture in modern natural product discovery, bridging the gap between genomic potential and chemical reality. The frameworks presented here—resistance-gene-guided mining, regulatory network analysis, and bioactive feature targeting—provide orthogonal yet complementary approaches to identify BGCs with high potential for novel bioactive compounds. Implementation of these protocols requires both computational expertise and experimental validation, but offers substantial rewards in the form of structurally novel compounds with desired bioactivities. As the field advances, integration of machine learning approaches like DECRiPPter [55] with the established frameworks outlined here will further enhance our ability to prioritize the most promising BGCs from the immense microbial dark matter, accelerating the discovery of urgently needed bioactive compounds.

Within the framework of genome mining and engineering for natural product (NP) discovery, the limitations of traditional prediction methods present a significant bottleneck. The vast and unexplored biosynthetic diversity encoded in microbial genomes requires computational approaches that can move beyond rule-based systems [59] [4]. Machine Learning (ML) and Deep Learning (DL) are revolutionizing this field by transforming genomic and chemical data into predictive models for biosynthetic gene cluster (BGC) discovery and bioactivity profiling [59] [60]. These data-driven approaches learn complex patterns from ever-growing genomic datasets, enabling researchers to overcome previous limitations in accuracy and scope, thus prioritizing the most promising candidates for experimental validation [59] [61]. This document provides detailed application notes and protocols for implementing these advanced computational strategies.

The integration of ML and DL into the NP discovery pipeline has led to the development of numerous specialized tools. Their performance varies based on the algorithm used, the class of NP targeted, and the dataset quality. The tables below summarize key quantitative metrics for prominent tools, offering a comparison point for researchers.

Table 1: Performance Metrics of ML/DL Tools for BGC and Bioactive Compound Prediction

Tool Name	Primary Application	Core Algorithm(s)	Reported Performance & Accuracy	Key Strengths
DeepBGC [59]	Identifies BGCs for major NP classes; predicts molecular activity	BiLSTM, RNN, Random Forest	AUC > 0.9 for major BGC classes on test sets [59]	Combines sequence modeling (BiLSTM) with functional annotation (RF) for high-confidence predictions.
decRiPPter [59]	Class-independent RiPP precursor peptide prediction	Support Vector Machine (SVM)	High precision in rediscovering known RiPPs; successfully identifies novel compounds [59]	Uses pan-genomics to link precursors to BGCs, enabling discovery of entirely new RiPP classes.
NeuRiPP [59]	Identifies RiPP precursor peptides	Parallel Convolutional Neural Network (CNN)	Outperforms existing tools in recall and precision for known RiPP subclasses [59]	Leverages CNNs to detect complex sequence motifs in precursor peptides.
FAST-NPS [51]	Self-resistance-gene-guided automated genome mining	Bioinformatics & Automation	100% bioactivity hit-rate (5/5 BGCs tested); 95% cloning success rate [51]	Integrates ARTS tool for BGC prioritization with fully automated cloning and expression via iBioFab.
CropARNet [62]	Genomic selection for complex crop traits	Self-Attention, Residual Network	Ranked 1st in prediction accuracy for 29 out of 53 agronomic traits [62]	Demonstrates the power of hybrid DL architectures adapted from other genomic prediction domains.

Table 2: Comparison of ML Algorithms and Their Applications in NP Discovery

Algorithm	Type	Common Applications in NP Discovery	Advantages	Limitations
Support Vector Machine (SVM) [59]	ML	A-domain specificity (NRPSpredictor2), RiPP classification (RiPPMiner, RODEO) [59]	Effective in high-dimensional spaces; robust with clear margin of separation.	Performance can be sensitive to the choice of kernel and parameters.
Random Forest (RF) [59]	ML	BGC boundary refinement (DeepBGC), RiPP analysis (RiPPMiner) [59]	Handles high-dimensional data well; reduces overfitting through ensemble learning.	Less interpretable than a single decision tree; can be computationally heavy.
Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) [59] [63]	DL	RiPP precursor identification (NeuRiPP), genomic feature extraction [59] [63]	Excellent at identifying local patterns and motifs in sequential data (e.g., protein sequences).	Requires large datasets for training; computationally intensive.
Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) [59] [63]	DL	BGC identification (DeepBGC, Deep-BGCpred), modeling genomic sequences [59]	Captures long-range dependencies and contextual information in sequences.	Prone to overfitting on small datasets; high computational cost.
Residual Network (ResNet) [63] [62]	DL	Hybrid models for genomic prediction (CropARNet, LSTM-ResNet) [63] [62]	Solves vanishing gradient problem, enabling very deep and powerful networks.	Complex architecture; requires significant data and computational resources.

Detailed Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: ML-Guided BGC Identification and Prioritization Using DeepBGC

This protocol details the process of identifying putative BGCs from a genomic dataset and prioritizing them based on DeepBGC's scoring system, which combines sequence modeling with random forest classification [59].

I. Materials and Data Preparation

• Genomic Data: Assemble genomic sequences in FASTA format. These can be whole genomes, chromosomes, or contigs from sequencing projects.
• Software Installation: Install DeepBGC. The recommended method is via the Bioconda package manager (conda install -c bioconda deepbgc) or by using its Docker image to ensure all dependencies are met.
• Reference Database: Ensure the Pfam database is downloaded and properly configured for the tool to perform domain annotation.

II. Method

• Step 1: Execute DeepBGC Run DeepBGC on your input FASTA file. A basic command is:
  This command will automatically run the sequence through the DeepBGC processing pipeline [59].

• Step 2: Pipeline Output and Interpretation The DeepBGC pipeline performs several steps: a. Gene Calling: Identifies open reading frames (ORFs) in the input sequence. b. Domain Annotation: Annotates protein domains using the Pfam database. c. Feature Embedding: Converts the sequence of Pfam domains into a numerical feature vector using a pre-trained Skip-gram model. d. BGC Prediction: Processes the feature vector through a Bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) network to identify BGC-like regions. e. Activity & Class Scoring: Finally, a Random Forest classifier assigns a probability score for the detected BGC being a true positive and predicts its most likely molecular activity and product class (e.g., NRPS, PKS, RiPP) [59].

• Step 3: Results Analysis The primary output is a file (e.g., *.bgc.csv) listing the identified BGCs with their genomic coordinates, product class prediction, and a BGC score between 0 and 1. Prioritize BGCs with a high score (e.g., >0.8) for further experimental investigation. The output also includes a detailed annotation file for visual inspection in tools like the antiSMASH final results page.

III. Critical Considerations

• Data Quality: The quality of gene predictions is paramount. Poorly assembled genomes or incorrect ORF calls will significantly degrade prediction accuracy.
• Applicability Domain: DeepBGC was trained on known major BGC classes. Its performance on highly novel or atypical BGCs may be lower, and results should be interpreted with caution [59].
• Validation: Computational predictions are hypotheses. All high-priority BGCs require experimental validation through heterologous expression or other molecular methods.

Protocol 2: Targeted Genome Mining for a Specific Bioactive Family Using GATOR-GC

This protocol uses GATOR-GC to perform targeted mining for a specific family of bioactive compounds, using the FK-family (immunosuppressants like FK506 and rapamycin) as a case study [4].

I. Materials and Data Preparation

• Query Proteins: Identify one or more "core" or "required" biosynthetic proteins for the NP family of interest. For the FK-family, this is the Lysine Cyclodeaminase (KCDA) enzyme and a specific chorismatase [4].
• Genomic Dataset: Prepare a dataset of genomic FASTA files from the taxonomic group you wish to mine (e.g., Actinomycetes).
• Software Installation: Install GATOR-GC according to the provided documentation, which includes setting up its dependencies (e.g., BLAST+, Python).

II. Method

• Step 1: Define Search Parameters Create a configuration file for GATOR-GC. Specify: a. Required Proteins: The essential, conserved proteins that define the BGC family (e.g., KCDA, chorismatase). A hit must contain all required proteins to be considered. b. Optional Proteins: Proteins that are often associated with the family but are not universally present (e.g., specific P450s, methyltransferases). These help in scoring and ranking hits. c. Required Distance: Set the maximum intergenic distance (in base pairs) allowed between required proteins for them to be considered part of the same cluster.

• Step 2: Execute GATOR-GC Run the tool with your configuration file and genomic dataset.

• Step 3: Analyze Syntenic Output GATOR-GC outputs "GATOR windows," which are the identified genomic regions containing your required proteins. The tool performs a syntenic analysis, comparing all windows to provide a global overview of BGC diversity within your dataset. Analyze the output to identify conserved core regions and variable regions that may indicate structural novelty [4].

III. Critical Considerations

• Protein Selection: The choice of required proteins is critical. They must be specific enough to avoid false positives but conserved enough to capture the desired family.
• Deduplication: GATOR-GC includes steps to identify and remove duplicate BGCs from closely related strains, streamlining downstream analysis.
• Manual Curation: While automated, the results should be manually inspected. Examine the genomic context of the hits to verify the presence of other expected biosynthetic genes and rule out false positives from fragmented assemblies or chance gene proximity.

Protocol 3: Self-Resistance-Gene-Guided Discovery with FAST-NPS

This protocol outlines the use of the FAST-NPS platform, which leverages the presence of self-resistance genes within a BGC as a robust, evolutionarily informed predictor of bioactivity to prioritize targets [51].

I. Materials and Data Preparation

• Bacterial Strains: Select producer strains (e.g., Streptomyces) for genome mining.
• Bioinformatics Tool: Access the ARTS (Antibiotic Resistant Target Seeker) tool to identify self-resistance genes within BGCs.
• Automation Platform: The FAST-NPS workflow is designed for the Illinois Biological Foundry (iBioFAB), but the principles can guide manual efforts [51].

II. Method

• Step 1: BGC Prioritization with ARTS Annotate the genome of the target strain(s) using antiSMASH to identify all BGCs. Subsequently, analyze these BGCs with the ARTS tool. ARTS searches for genes encoding putative self-resistance mechanisms (e.g., drug efflux pumps, target-modifying enzymes) that are physically linked to the BGC. Prioritize BGCs with strong ARTS hits for experimental capture [51].

• Step 2: Automated BGC Capture and Heterologous Expression The FAST-NPS platform automates the following steps on the iBioFAB: a. Capture: The prioritized BGCs are cloned directly from the genomic DNA using the high-efficiency CAPTURE method. b. Engineering: The captured BGCs are assembled into expression vectors. c. Transformation: The vectors are transformed into a heterologous host (e.g., Streptomyces). d. Cultivation & Analysis: The expression hosts are cultivated in parallel, and the culture extracts are prepared for chemical analysis [51].

• Step 3: Bioactivity Screening Screen the culture extracts from the expression hosts in bioactivity assays relevant to the predicted self-resistance mechanism (e.g., antibacterial assays if the resistance gene suggests an antibiotic target). A positive bioactivity result strongly indicates the production of a bioactive compound by the captured BGC [51].

III. Critical Considerations

• Expression Challenges: Heterologous expression remains a major hurdle. Even with successful cloning, not all BGCs will express functionally in the chosen host. FAST-NPS reported a functional expression rate of ~11% (12/105 cloned BGCs), though with a 100% bioactivity hit-rate on those expressed [51].
• Automation Dependency: The full throughput of FAST-NPS requires access to an automated biofoundry. The protocol can be adapted manually but at a significantly lower throughput.
• Resistance Gene Specificity: The predictive power is tied to the correct identification of a genuine self-resistance gene, which requires expert curation.

Workflow Visualization

The following diagrams, generated with Graphviz DOT language, illustrate the logical workflows for the two primary ML-driven genome mining strategies discussed in this document.

BGC Discovery and Prioritization Workflow

Targeted Bioactivity-Focused Mining

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Computational Tools and Resources for ML-Driven Genome Mining

Item Name	Function / Application	Key Features & Notes
antiSMASH [4]	Rule-based identification and annotation of BGCs in genomic data.	Serves as the foundational tool for initial BGC discovery; provides input for ML tools. Available as a web server and command-line tool.
MIBiG Database [59] [4]	A curated repository of experimentally characterized BGCs.	The "gold standard" dataset used for training and benchmarking ML models for BGC prediction.
ARTS Tool [51]	Identifies self-resistance genes within BGCs to predict bioactivity.	A critical prioritization filter; integrates with the FAST-NPS automated platform.
GATOR-GC [4]	Targeted genome mining tool for finding specific BGC families.	Allows user-defined required/optional protein searches and performs syntenic analysis of results.
DeepBGC [59]	ML-based tool for identifying BGCs and predicting their product's activity.	Uses a hybrid BiLSTM and Random Forest model to go beyond rule-based detection.
iBioFAB [51]	An automated biofoundry platform for high-throughput genetic engineering.	Enables the scalable, parallel cloning and expression of prioritized BGCs as implemented in the FAST-NPS method.
Conda/Bioconda	Package and environment management system for scientific software.	Simplifies the installation and dependency management of complex bioinformatics tools like DeepBGC.

The discovery of microbial natural products (NPs) has entered a transformative "deep-mining era," moving from traditional serendipitous isolation to data-driven, targeted mining [45]. This paradigm shift is powered by the synergistic integration of genomics and metabolomics, enabling researchers to systematically connect biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) to their small molecule products [45]. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) has emerged as a cornerstone technology in this endeavor, providing the high-throughput, sensitive detection necessary to bridge the genome-metabolome gap—where historically only about 25% of predicted BGCs had known products [45]. This Application Note details a robust protocol for employing LC-MS/MS-based metabolomics to link genetic blueprints to metabolic outputs, a critical capability for modern natural product discovery research.

Materials and Reagents

Research Reagent Solutions

Table 1: Essential Materials and Reagents for LC-MS/MS-Based Metabolomics

Item	Function/Brief Explanation
Ultra-Performance Liquid Chromatography (UPLC) System	Provides high-resolution separation of complex metabolite mixtures from biological extracts prior to mass spectrometry analysis, reducing ion suppression and improving detection [64].
High-Resolution Mass Spectrometer (HRMS)	Precisely determines the mass-to-charge ratio (m/z) of ions with high mass accuracy and resolution; common platforms include orbital trap, time-of-flight (TOF), and Fourier-transform ion cyclotron resonance (FT-ICR) systems [45] [64].
LC-MS/MS Solvents	High-purity solvents (e.g., water, acetonitrile, methanol), often with modifiers like formic acid or ammonium acetate, are used for chromatographic separation and efficient electrospray ionization [64].
Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) Cartridges	Used for sample clean-up and pre-concentration of metabolites from complex biological matrices, helping to remove interfering compounds and reduce matrix effects [65].
Authenticated Chemical Standards	Commercially available pure compounds used to construct in-house spectral libraries for the confident identification (Level 1) of metabolites based on retention time and fragmentation pattern matching [64].
Quality Control (QC) Sample	A pooled sample created by combining small aliquots of all experimental samples. It is analyzed repeatedly throughout the analytical run to monitor instrument stability, balance analytical bias, and correct for technical noise [64].
Global Natural Products Social Molecular Networking (GNPS)	A public online platform and repository for sharing and processing tandem MS data, enabling community-wide metabolite annotation and discovery of related compounds via molecular networking [45].
antiSMASH	A comprehensive genome mining pipeline used for the automated identification and annotation of Biosynthetic Gene Clusters (BGCs) in genomic data, predicting the potential of a strain to produce secondary metabolites [45].

Experimental Protocol

A Workflow for Integrated Genomic and Metabolomic Analysis

This protocol outlines a multi-omics strategy for discovering novel natural products, from genomic potential to chemical identification.

Diagram 1: Integrated genome mining and metabolomics workflow.

Detailed Methodologies

Genome Mining and BGC Prioritization

• Genome Sequencing and Assembly: Begin with high-quality DNA extraction from the microbial strain. Utilize long-read sequencing technologies (e.g., PacBio HiFi for >99.9% accuracy or Nanopore MinION for real-time analysis) to generate a comprehensive genome assembly [45].
• BGC Prediction: Submit the assembled genome to the antiSMASH database (currently version 7.0) for analysis. This tool uses hidden Markov models (HMMs) to identify and annotate over 40 different types of BGCs, such as those for polyketides (PKs), non-ribosomal peptides (NRPs), and ribosomally synthesized and post-translationally modified peptides (RiPPs) [45].
• BGC Prioritization: Analyze antiSMASH results to identify "cryptic" or "orphan" BGCs—those not associated with known compounds. Prioritize BGCs based on criteria such as:
  • Novelty of gene cluster architecture.
  • Presence in under-explored microbial taxa (e.g., verrucose microbes).
  • Identification of putative RiPP BGCs with signature post-translational modification enzymes, such as P450 enzymes, using specialized tools like RiPPer and SPECO (short peptide and enzyme co-localization) [45].

LC-MS/MS-Based Metabolite Profiling

• Strain Cultivation and Metabolite Extraction:

  • Cultivate the strain under conditions designed to activate secondary metabolism. The OSMAC (One Strain Many Compounds) approach is highly recommended, which involves varying culture parameters (media, temperature, aeration) to elicit the production of different metabolites [45].
  • Harvest cells and/or culture broth. Extract metabolites using a solvent system appropriate for the chemical diversity expected from the prioritized BGCs (e.g., a methanol:water:chloroform mixture for broad-polarity coverage) [65].

• LC-MS/MS Data Acquisition:

  • Chromatography: Use a UPLC system with a C18 reverse-phase column. Employ a binary solvent gradient (e.g., Water + 0.1% Formic Acid vs. Acetonitrile + 0.1% Formic Acid) over a 10-20 minute runtime to separate metabolites [64] [65].
  • Mass Spectrometry: Acquire data in data-dependent acquisition (DDA) mode on a high-resolution mass spectrometer. Key parameters:
    • MS1 (Full Scan): Resolution ≥ 100,000, mass range 100-1500 m/z.
    • MS2 (Fragmentation): Isolate top N most intense ions from the MS1 scan and fragment them (e.g., via HCD or CID) to obtain structural MS/MS spectra [64].

• Data Preprocessing and Quality Control:

  • Process raw LC-MS/MS data using software tools like MZmine 3, XCMS, or MAVEN. This step includes peak detection, retention time alignment, and integration to create a feature table containing m/z, retention time, and intensity for each detected ion across all samples [64].
  • Incorporate a rigorous Quality Control (QC) regimen. Analyze a pooled QC sample repeatedly throughout the batch run. Use this data to monitor instrument performance, correct for signal drift, and remove features with high variance, ensuring data quality [64].

Metabolite Annotation and Integration with Genomic Data

• Molecular Networking and Annotation:

  • Submit the MS/MS data to the Global Natural Products Social Molecular Networking (GNPS) platform. GNPS creates molecular networks where structurally related metabolites cluster together based on spectral similarity, facilitating the annotation of unknown compounds [45].
  • Use in-house or commercial spectral libraries (e.g., NIST, MassBank) for direct matching to identify known compounds. For unknowns, use in-silico tools like SIRIUS to predict molecular formulas and structures [45] [64].

• Multi-Omics Integration and Target Validation:

  • Correlate the metabolomics data with the genomic predictions. The presence of a mass signal (and its molecular network cluster) that is uniquely produced when a specific BGC is expressed provides strong circumstantial evidence for the BGC's product.
  • To definitively link a BGC to a metabolite, employ heterologous expression. Clone the entire prioritized BGC into a tractable host (e.g., Streptomyces albus J1074) and analyze the metabolome of the resulting strain via LC-MS/MS. The appearance of the target metabolite in the engineered strain confirms the BGC's function [45].

Key Data and Comparative Analysis

Representative Metabolite Profiling Data

The following table summarizes quantitative data from a hypothetical integrated study, illustrating the type of results generated by this protocol when a novel BGC is successfully linked to its metabolic product.

Table 2: Representative LC-MS/MS Data from the Discovery of a Novel P450-Modified RiPP (e.g., Micitide 982)

Metabolite Name	Theoretical m/z	Observed m/z	Mass Error (ppm)	Retention Time (min)	Associated BGC	Key MS/MS Fragments	Production Host
Kitasatide 1019	1019.5012	1019.5008	0.4	8.5	kst	887.4, 754.3, 621.2	E. coli
Kitasatide 1017	1017.4855	1017.4851	0.4	9.1	kst	901.4, 768.3, 635.2	E. coli
Micitide 982	982.4520	982.4515	0.5	7.2	mci	834.3, 721.2, 588.1	E. coli
Strecintide 839	839.3871	839.3869	0.2	6.8	scn	712.3, 585.2, 458.1	E. coli
Gristide 834	834.3815	834.3810	0.6	6.5	sgr	721.3, 608.2, 495.1	E. coli

Note: Data is adapted from the discovery of P450-modified RiPPs, where heterologous expression of BGCs (e.g., kst, mci) in E. coli *led to the production of novel macrocyclic peptides, confirmed by LC-MS/MS [45].

Multi-Omics Integration Strategies

Table 3: Comparison of Multi-Omics Integration Strategies for Natural Product Discovery

Integration Strategy	Core Methodology	Key Tools/Platforms	Primary Application	Key Advantage
Genomics-Guided Metabolomics	Use genomic predictions (BGCs) to target metabolomics analysis on specific compound classes.	antiSMASH, PRISM, MIBiG	Targeted discovery of compounds from a specific biosynthetic class (e.g., NRPs, PKs).	Dramatically reduces the search space in complex metabolomes, increasing discovery efficiency [45].
Molecular Networking-Coupled Genomics	Correlate MS/MS molecular networks with genomic BGC abundance across multiple strains.	GNPS, antiSMASH	Identifying the products of variable BGCs across a strain library and discovering new compound variants.	Visual and intuitive connection between chemical diversity and genetic potential, powerful for homolog discovery [45].
Heterologous Expression & Metabolite Profiling	Express silent or cryptic BGCs in a heterologous host and profile the metabolome for new compounds.	Gibson Assembly, LC-MS/MS	Directly linking a specific BGC to its metabolic product(s) and activating silent genetic pathways.	Provides definitive proof of BGC function and allows for production optimization [45].

Discussion

The integrated protocol detailed herein, combining sensitive LC-MS/MS metabolomics with sophisticated genome mining, represents a powerful and streamlined approach for modern natural product discovery. This methodology directly addresses the long-standing challenge of the "genome-metabolome gap," providing a clear, actionable path from a genetic sequence to a chemical structure [45]. The strength of this workflow lies in the virtuous cycle it creates: genomic data provides a hypothesis (a predicted BGC product), which metabolomics tests (via targeted LC-MS/MS analysis), the results of which then refine the genomic understanding and guide further experimental validation.

For the drug discovery professional, this means a more efficient and rational pipeline for identifying novel bioactive leads. By focusing experimental efforts on strains and conditions predicted to be high-yielding for novel compounds, resource allocation is optimized. The ability to activate and characterize "cryptic" BGCs—which are abundant in microbial genomes but silent under standard laboratory conditions—opens up a vast, untapped reservoir of chemical diversity with potential therapeutic applications [45]. As the tools for both genomics (e.g., next-generation sequencing, advanced bioinformatics) and metabolomics (e.g., ultra-sensitive MS, powerful visualization software) continue to advance, this multi-omics integration will undoubtedly remain the cornerstone of genome mining and engineering for natural product research [45] [66].

Engineering Biosynthetic Pathways for Improved Yield and Novel Analogues

Within the framework of genome mining and engineering for natural product discovery, a central challenge is translating the genetic potential encoded in biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) into high yields of desired compounds or novel analogues with optimized properties. Genomic sequencing has revealed that the majority of BGCs in microorganisms are silent or cryptic and do not produce the predicted natural products under standard laboratory conditions, while others express at yields too low for practical application [67] [68]. This application note details proven protocols to address these challenges, focusing on strategic strain engineering and cultivation to activate cryptic pathways and enhance titers, and on pathway engineering to generate novel chemical diversity.

Strategic Approaches and Key Quantitative Data

The integration of genome mining with subsequent bioengineering strategies has led to significant improvements in natural product access. The following table summarizes the reported efficacy of several key approaches.

Table 1: Summary of Bioengineering Strategies for Yield Improvement and Novel Analogue Discovery

Strategy	Reported Yield Increase / Outcome	Key Natural Product Example(s)	Mechanism of Action
Ribosome Engineering	Dramatic activation of antibiotic production; used to confer resistance to streptomycin/rifampicin [68]	Actinorhodin, Undecylprodigiosin [68]	Introduction of mutations in rpsL (ribosomal protein S12) or rpoB (RNA polymerase) that confer antibiotic resistance and pleiotropically activate secondary metabolism.
OSMAC (One Strain Many Compounds)	Identification of 18 diverse compounds (including 2 novel pyrroles) from a single fungus [26]	Kyushuenines A & B, and 16 known metabolites from Diaporthe kyushuensis [26]	Modulation of cultivation parameters (e.g., salt addition, solid vs. liquid media) to trigger transcriptional reprogramming and activate cryptic BGCs.
Heterologous Expression	Enabled discovery of novel antibiotics and characterization of biosynthetic pathways from unculturable or recalcitrant strains [67] [68]	Thiolactomycin, Closthioamide [67] [68]	Transfer of entire BGCs into a tractable surrogate host (e.g., Streptomyces coelicolor) for expression and characterization.
Combinatorial Biosynthesis & Mutasynthesis	Generation of "non-natural" natural product variants with improved biological or physicochemical properties [68]	Novel andrimid derivatives, Erythromycin analogs [68]	Re-engineering of biosynthetic assembly lines (e.g., NRPS, PKS) to incorporate non-native substrates or module rearrangements.

Detailed Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Ribosome Engineering for Activation of Silent BGCs

This protocol uses the introduction of cumulative drug-resistance mutations to pleiotropically activate silent biosynthetic gene clusters in actinomycetes [68].

Materials:

• Strains: Wild-type Streptomyces sp. of interest.
• Media: Appropriate agar and liquid culture media (e.g., Soy Flour Mannitol (SFM) agar, Tryptic Soy Broth (TSB)).
• Antibiotics: Sterile stock solutions of streptomycin sulfate and rifampicin.

Procedure:

• Preparation of Spore Suspension: Harvest spores from a well-sporulated culture of the wild-type strain and suspend in sterile water to a final concentration of 10^8 spores/mL.
• Primary Selection (Streptomycin Resistance):
  • Spread 100 µL of the spore suspension onto SFM agar plates containing a gradient of streptomycin (0.5 to 5 µg/mL).
  • Incubate at 28°C until single colonies appear (typically 5-7 days).
  • Pick resistant colonies and re-streak onto fresh antibiotic plates to ensure purity.
• Secondary Selection (Rifampicin Resistance):
  • Prepare a spore suspension from a confirmed streptomycin-resistant mutant.
  • Spread onto SFM agar plates containing a gradient of rifampicin (0.5 to 5 µg/mL).
  • Incubate and isolate pure double-mutant colonies as in Step 2.
• Fermentation and Metabolite Analysis:
  • Inoculate the wild-type and mutant strains into liquid medium and culture under standard conditions.
  • After a suitable fermentation period, extract the culture broth with an equal volume of ethyl acetate.
  • Concentrate the organic extracts under reduced pressure and analyze using comparative metabolomic methods such as HPLC-PDA or LC-HRMS.
• Validation: Identify and purify activated metabolites showing differential production in mutants versus the wild-type strain. Confirm the presence of resistance mutations by sequencing the rpsL and rpoB genes.

The following workflow outlines the key steps in this protocol:

Protocol 2: OSMAC Approach to Elicit Chemical Diversity

The OSMAC strategy leverages microbial metabolic plasticity by systematically altering cultivation parameters to activate cryptic BGCs [26].

Materials:

• Strain: Pure culture of the fungus or bacterium of interest.
• Media Variants:
  • Potato Dextrose Broth (PDB).
  • PDB supplemented with 3% (w/v) NaBr.
  • PDB supplemented with 3% (w/v) sea salt.
  • Rice-based solid medium.
• Equipment: Shaking incubator, sterile culture flasks, chromatography equipment (HPLC, TLC).

Procedure:

• Inoculum Preparation: Generate a standardized inoculum (e.g., fungal spore or bacterial suspension) from a fresh culture.
• Parallel Fermentations:
  • Inoculate a series of culture flasks containing the different media variants with the same volume of standardized inoculum.
  • For liquid cultures, incubate at 28°C with shaking at 180 rpm for a predetermined period (e.g., 6-14 days).
  • For solid-state rice medium, incubate statically under the same temperature conditions.
• Metabolite Extraction:
  • For liquid cultures, separate the broth and mycelium by filtration. Extract the broth with ethyl acetate. Macerate the mycelium in methanol and concentrate.
  • For solid cultures, extract the entire fermented material with a solvent like ethyl acetate or methanol.
  • Combine and concentrate all extracts.
• Chemical Profiling:
  • Analyze the crude extracts using analytical HPLC-PDA or TLC.
  • Use LC-HRMS and molecular networking to visualize chemical diversity and prioritize extracts containing unique features.
• Isolation and Identification: Scale up the most promising cultures. Use a combination of chromatographic techniques (e.g., vacuum liquid chromatography, preparative HPLC) to isolate novel or target compounds. Elucidate structures using spectroscopic methods (NMR, HRMS).

The logical flow of the OSMAC strategy for uncovering chemical diversity is as follows:

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Successful implementation of the described protocols requires a suite of specific reagents and tools. The following table details key components.

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents for Biosynthetic Pathway Engineering

Reagent / Material	Function / Application	Specific Examples / Notes
AntiSMASH Software	Automated bioinformatics tool for identification and annotation of BGCs in genomic data [67].	Critical for initial genome mining to prioritize BGCs for experimental work.
Streptomycin Sulfate	Selective agent for ribosome engineering; induces rpsL mutations conferring resistance and activating secondary metabolism [68].	Used at concentrations ranging from 0.5 to 5 µg/mL in solid agar.
Rifampicin	Selective agent for RNA polymerase engineering; induces rpoB mutations for pleiotropic activation of silent BGCs [68].	Used in combination with streptomycin for cumulative activation effects.
Heterologous Hosts	Surrogate expression systems for BGCs from uncultivable or genetically intractable organisms [67] [68].	Streptomyces coelicolor, S. lividans, Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Chemical Elicitors (OSMAC)	Modify culture conditions to trigger transcriptional reprogramming and activate cryptic BGCs [26].	Sodium bromide (NaBr), sea salt, specific carbon/nitrogen sources.
analytical HPLC-PDA/HRMS	Core analytical platform for metabolite profiling, dereplication, and discovery from complex extracts [26].	Enables comparative metabolomics and real-time monitoring of chemical diversity.

The integration of genome mining with targeted bioengineering protocols provides a powerful, systematic pipeline for natural product discovery. Strategies such as ribosome engineering and OSMAC effectively unlock the vast silent metabolic potential of microorganisms, leading to the discovery of novel compounds. Furthermore, combinatorial biosynthesis and mutasynthesis allow for the rational design of analogues, optimizing the pharmacological profiles of lead molecules. Together, these methodologies, supported by the essential toolkit of reagents and analytical techniques, form a cornerstone of modern research in genomics-driven drug discovery.

Addressing Strengths and Weaknesses of Current Genome Mining Pipelines

Genome mining has revolutionized natural product discovery by transitioning the field from traditional bioactivity-guided fractionation to a targeted, sequence-based approach [69] [70]. This computational strategy involves systematically analyzing microbial genomes to identify biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) that encode the production of bioactive secondary metabolites [70]. The fundamental premise driving this paradigm shift is the recognition that sequenced microbes harbor a vastly greater biosynthetic potential than observed through traditional cultivation methods, with many BGCs remaining "silent" or "cryptic" under standard laboratory conditions [2]. As sequencing costs have plummeted and bioinformatic tools have matured, genome mining has become an indispensable approach for uncovering novel therapeutic compounds, including antibiotics, anticancer agents, and other bioactive molecules [69] [70]. This application note examines the current landscape of genome mining pipelines, evaluating their strengths and limitations while providing detailed protocols for their implementation in natural product discovery research.

Current Genome Mining Tool Landscape

Algorithmic Approaches and Their Applications

Contemporary genome mining tools primarily employ two complementary computational strategies: hard-coded rule-based systems and machine learning (ML)-based approaches [70]. Rule-based algorithms (e.g., antiSMASH, PRISM) leverage conserved domain signatures and biosynthetic logic to identify BGCs based on our existing understanding of natural product biosynthesis [70]. These tools are particularly effective for well-characterized BGC classes like polyketide synthases (PKS), non-ribosomal peptide synthetases (NRPS), and ribosomally synthesized and post-translationally modified peptides (RiPPs) [70]. In contrast, ML-based tools (e.g., DeepBGC, GECCO) employ pattern recognition to identify novel BGCs that may lack canonical signature domains, potentially uncovering entirely new classes of natural products [70] [61].

Table 1: Major Genome Mining Pipelines and Their Characteristics

Pipeline/Tool	Algorithm Type	Primary Application	Strengths	Limitations
antiSMASH	Rule-based	BGC identification & classification	Comprehensive output; user-friendly web interface	Bias toward known BGC architectures
DeepBGC	Machine learning	Novel BGC discovery	Identifies non-canonical BGCs	Requires extensive training data
PRISM	Rule-based & ML hybrid	Structural prediction of NRPS/PKS	Predicts chemical structures	Limited to specific BGC classes
ARTS	Rule-based	BGC prioritization via resistance genes	Targets bioactive compounds	Specialized use case
CompareM2	Integrated pipeline	Comparative genomics	All-in-one solution; automated reporting	Computational resource intensive

Performance Metrics and Practical Considerations

The practical implementation of genome mining tools requires careful consideration of their performance characteristics. CompareM2 exemplifies the trend toward integrated pipelines that combine multiple analytical tools into a cohesive workflow [71]. Benchmarking studies indicate that CompareM2 demonstrates significantly better scalability than predecessors like Tormes and Bactopia, with running time increasing approximately linearly even with large input genomes [71]. This pipeline achieves a notable balance between comprehensive analysis and user accessibility, featuring containerized software bundles and automated database setup that lower the entry barrier for non-bioinformaticians [71].

Specialized tools have emerged to address specific challenges in natural product discovery. The ARTS (Antibiotic Resistant Target Seeker) tool implements a resistance gene-based mining strategy that prioritizes BGCs likely to produce bioactive compounds by identifying co-localized self-resistance genes [51]. This approach has demonstrated remarkable efficiency in proof-of-concept studies, with one automated platform (FAST-NPS) achieving a 100% success rate for discovering bioactive compounds from prioritized BGCs [51].

Strengths of Modern Genome Mining Pipelines

Comprehensive BGC Detection Capabilities

Modern genome mining pipelines successfully address the historical problem of dereplication by enabling in silico identification of known compounds before resource-intensive laboratory work begins [70]. Tools like antiSMASH can compare identified BGCs against databases of characterized clusters, preventing redundant discovery efforts [70]. Furthermore, these pipelines have revealed the astonishing hidden biosynthetic potential of microbial taxa previously considered well-characterized. For instance, Streptomyces hygroscopicus sp. XM201 was found to harbor more than 50 putative BGCs, far exceeding the number of compounds detected under standard cultivation conditions [70].

The integration of multiple analytical approaches within single platforms represents another significant strength. CompareM2 exemplifies this trend by incorporating diverse tools for specific analyses: Bakta or Prokka for annotation, InterProScan for protein signature database searches, dbCAN for carbohydrate-active enzymes, antiSMASH for BGC detection, and GTDB-Tk for taxonomic assignment [71]. This comprehensive integration enables researchers to move seamlessly from raw genomic data to biological interpretation without developing complex analytical workflows.

Accessibility and Automation

Recent genome mining pipelines have made substantial progress in user experience and computational efficiency. CompareM2 addresses a critical bottleneck in bioinformatics by offering straightforward installation through containerization and automated database setup [71]. The pipeline generates a portable dynamic report that highlights central findings with explanatory text and figures, significantly enhancing accessibility for researchers with limited computational backgrounds [71].

The emergence of fully automated platforms represents the cutting edge of accessibility in genome mining. The FAST-NPS (Self-resistance-gene-guided, high-throughput automated genome mining) system integrates the ARTS tool with robotic instrumentation to automate the entire discovery process from BGC identification to heterologous expression [51]. In proof-of-concept testing, this system achieved a 95% success rate in cloning 105 BGCs from 11 Streptomyces strains, demonstrating the potential for scalable natural product discovery [51].

Limitations and Technical Challenges

Analytical Gaps and Prediction Accuracy

Despite considerable advances, genome mining pipelines continue to face significant challenges in detecting non-canonical BGCs. Rule-based algorithms inherently struggle to identify entirely novel classes of natural products that diverge from established biosynthetic logic [70]. This limitation is particularly evident for certain RiPP families that lack conserved signature sequences across different classes [70]. The fundamental bias toward known BGC architectures means that current tools likely overlook substantial microbial biosynthetic potential.

Structural prediction inaccuracies present another major limitation. While pipelines like antiSMASH and PRISM can predict core structures for certain classes like NRPS and PKS compounds, these predictions remain imperfect, especially for trans-AT PKS systems where the colinearity rule does not apply [70]. Post-assembly-line modifications are particularly challenging to predict accurately, potentially leading to incorrect structural assignments [2]. This limitation is evidenced by the cautious approach taken in syn-BNP (synthetic-bioinformatic natural product) studies, where predicted structures are chemically synthesized but may differ from the native metabolites [2].

Functional Expression and Experimental Validation

A persistent challenge in genome mining is the low success rate of heterologous expression. Even when BGCs are successfully identified and cloned, functional expression remains a major bottleneck. In the FAST-NPS automated platform, while cloning succeeded for 105 BGCs, only 12 were functionally expressed—a success rate of approximately 11% [51]. This highlights the significant gap between genetic potential and realized compound production that continues to hamper the field.

The challenge of activating silent BGCs extends beyond heterologous expression. In native producers, many BGCs are not expressed under standard laboratory conditions, requiring specialized activation strategies [70] [26]. While OSMAC (One Strain Many Compounds) approaches have shown promise by modifying cultivation parameters, the underlying regulatory networks governing BGC expression remain poorly understood, making systematic activation difficult [26].

Table 2: Technical Challenges and Emerging Solutions in Genome Mining

Challenge	Impact on Discovery	Emerging Solutions
Non-canonical BGC detection	Missed novel compound classes	Machine learning approaches [70]
Silent BGC activation	Limited compound production	OSMAC, heterologous expression, co-culture [26]
Structural prediction inaccuracy	Incorrect compound identification	Hybrid prediction methods [70]
Low heterologous expression	Failed compound production	Improved expression hosts & systems [51]
Database bias	Reduced novelty of discoveries	Expanded reference databases [70]

Integrated Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Automated Genome Mining with CompareM2

This protocol describes the comprehensive analysis of bacterial genomes using the CompareM2 pipeline, which integrates multiple bioinformatic tools into a single workflow [71].

Materials:

• Computational Resources: Linux-compatible OS with min. 32-core CPU and adequate RAM for dataset size
• Software Dependencies: Conda-compatible package manager (Miniforge/Mamba/Miniconda), Apptainer runtime
• Input Data: Assembled bacterial genomes in FASTA format

Procedure:

• Installation: Install CompareM2 using the provided installation script, which automatically sets up all dependencies and databases.
• Configuration: Set environment variables for database directories and configuration files. For high-performance computing clusters, configure workload manager settings (Slurm/PBS).
• Pipeline Execution: Execute the main pipeline with a single command, specifying input genomes and desired analytical modules.
• Report Generation: The pipeline automatically generates a dynamic report containing quality control metrics, functional annotations, phylogenetic analyses, and comparative genomics results.
• Result Interpretation: Review the portable report document, which includes explanatory text and figures highlighting significant findings.

Troubleshooting:

• For dependency issues, ensure all containerized software bundles are correctly installed.
• If database downloads fail, manually set the database directory environment variable.
• For memory issues with large genome sets, adjust the resource allocation parameters.

Protocol 2: Resistance Gene-Guided BGC Prioritization

This protocol utilizes the ARTS tool for targeted discovery of bioactive natural products, particularly antibiotics, by leveraging co-localized resistance genes as bioactivity predictors [51] [2].

Materials:

• Bioinformatic Tools: ARTS web tool or standalone version
• Genomic Data: Assembled microbial genomes in FASTA format or annotated GBK files
• Downstream Validation: Cloning system (e.g., CAPTURE method), heterologous expression host

Procedure:

• Genome Submission: Input target genome sequences into the ARTS analysis pipeline.
• Resistance Gene Identification: ARTS scans for known resistance genes using its built-in database.
• BGC-Retrogene Co-localization: The tool identifies BGCs physically linked to resistance genes within the genome.
• Priority Ranking: BGCs are ranked based on the strength of association with resistance mechanisms.
• Experimental Validation: Prioritized BGCs are cloned using the CAPTURE method and expressed in suitable heterologous hosts.
• Bioactivity Testing: Crude extracts are screened for antimicrobial activity against relevant pathogens.

Applications: This approach successfully identified the thiotetronic acid natural product thiolactomycin from Salinispora strains and pyxidicyclins from Pyxidicoccus fallax [2]. The method significantly increases the probability of discovering bioactive compounds compared to untargeted approaches.

Protocol 3: OSMAC Approach for Silent BGC Activation

The One Strain Many Compounds (OSMAC) method activates silent BGCs by varying cultivation parameters to induce alternative metabolic states [26].

Materials:

• Microbial Strains: Pure cultures of target microbes (e.g., Streptomyces, fungi)
• Culture Media: Diverse base media (e.g., Potato Dextrose Broth, R2A, ISP2)
• Modifiers: Salts (NaCl, NaBr), enzyme inhibitors, epigenetic modifiers
• Analytical Equipment: HPLC-HRMS for metabolomic profiling

Procedure:

• Strain Cultivation: Inoculate target strain into multiple media formulations with varying:
  • Carbon and nitrogen sources
  • Salt concentrations (e.g., 3% NaBr, 3% sea salt)
  • Physical conditions (pH, aeration, temperature)
• Extraction: After incubation, extract metabolites using appropriate organic solvents.
• Metabolomic Analysis: Analyze extracts using LC-HRMS to generate chemical profiles.
• Data Analysis: Compare chemical profiles across conditions to identify uniquely produced compounds.
• Scale-up: Scale up promising conditions for compound isolation and structure elucidation.

Application Example: In a study of Diaporthe kyushuensis ZMU-48-1, OSMAC approach with PDB supplemented with 3% NaBr or 3% sea salt revealed novel pyrrole derivatives (kyushuenines A and B) with antifungal activity that were not produced in standard media [26].

Visualization of Genome Mining Workflows

Genome Mining Workflow and Key Challenges

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Computational Tools for Genome Mining

Category	Specific Tools/Reagents	Function/Purpose	Application Context
BGC Detection	antiSMASH, DeepBGC, PRISM	Identifies biosynthetic gene clusters in genomic data	Initial genome mining & BGC discovery [70]
Comparative Genomics	CompareM2, Panaroo	Compares BGCs across multiple genomes	Evolutionary studies & BGC novelty assessment [71]
BGC Prioritization	ARTS, CORASON	Prioritizes BGCs based on resistance genes or phylogeny	Targeted discovery of bioactive compounds [51] [2]
Heterologous Expression	CAPTURE method, iBioFAB	Clones and expresses BGCs in surrogate hosts	BGC activation & compound production [51]
Culture Activation	OSMAC media modifiers, epigenetic inducers	Activates silent BGCs through culture manipulation	Inducing production of cryptic metabolites [26]
Metabolomic Analysis	LC-HRMS, GNPS molecular networking	Correlates BGCs with metabolic products	Linking genes to compounds [2]

Genome mining pipelines have fundamentally transformed natural product discovery, enabling researchers to transition from serendipitous finding to targeted investigation. The strengths of modern approaches—including comprehensive BGC detection, integrated analytical capabilities, and increasing automation—have dramatically accelerated the discovery process. However, significant challenges remain in detecting non-canonical BGCs, accurately predicting structural features, and functionally expressing identified clusters. The continued integration of machine learning approaches with experimental validation, coupled with improved bioinformatic tools and expression systems, promises to further unlock the immense hidden biosynthetic potential encoded in microbial genomes. For researchers in this field, success will increasingly depend on the strategic combination of computational predictions with innovative laboratory techniques to bridge the gap between genetic potential and compound discovery.

Proving Value: Validation, Bioactivity, and Comparative Analysis

Within the paradigm of genome mining and engineering for natural product discovery, establishing the novelty of a discovered compound is a critical, multi-faceted challenge. The process extends beyond initial bioinformatic prediction to rigorous experimental validation, requiring a confluence of techniques to definitively characterize a new chemical entity and its biosynthetic origin [10] [72]. This protocol details an integrated workflow leveraging comparative genomics for phylogenetic context and structural elucidation to chemically define novel natural products. The approach addresses a central bottleneck in modern natural product research: efficiently prioritizing and characterizing the vast number of biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) revealed by microbial genome sequencing, thereby moving from genetic potential to confirmed chemical novelty [72] [4].

Experimental Principles and Workflow

The foundational principle of this methodology is the correlation of a unique genetic signature with a unique chemical structure. Comparative genomics is used to identify BGCs that are phylogenetically distinct from known clusters, suggesting the potential for novel chemistry [73]. This genetic analysis must then be coupled with the heterologous expression of the BGC to produce the compound, followed by advanced analytical techniques for structural elucidation [51]. The final step involves cross-referencing the newly determined structure against public databases to confirm its novelty. The following workflow diagram encapsulates this multi-stage process.

Key Research Reagent Solutions

Successful execution of the protocol depends on a suite of specialized computational tools and biological reagents. The table below catalogues the essential components, their specific functions, and illustrative examples.

Table 1: Essential Research Reagents and Tools for Genomic-Led Natural Product Discovery

Category	Item/Reagent	Function/Application	Examples/Notes
Bioinformatics Tools	BGC Prediction Software	Identifies putative biosynthetic gene clusters in genomic data.	antiSMASH [72] [73], DeepBGC [4]
	Targeted Mining Tools	Identifies specific BGC families based on custom criteria.	GATOR-GC [4], ARTS (self-resistance genes) [51]
	Comparative Genomics Platforms	Compares multiple genomes to find unique regions.	EDGAR [73]
	BGC Databases	Repository for known BGCs for comparison.	MIBiG [4], BiG-FAM [4]
Biological Materials	Heterologous Host	A genetically tractable host for expressing silent BGCs.	Streptomyces coelicolor [72], S. lividans [51]
	Cloning System	Captures and shuttles large BGC DNA fragments.	CAPTURE method [51], BAC vectors
Analytical Techniques	High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry (HRMS)	Determines precise molecular mass and formula.	LC-HRMS for dereplication [41]
	Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR)	Elucidates full molecular structure and stereochemistry.	1D/2D NMR for structural confirmation [41]

Detailed Methodologies

Computational Protocol for BGC Identification and Prioritization

This phase focuses on mining genomic data to identify high-priority candidate BGCs predicted to encode novel bioactive compounds.

• Step 1: Genome Sequencing and Assembly

  • Utilize next-generation sequencing platforms (e.g., Illumina for short-read, PacBio or Oxford Nanopore for long-read sequencing) to obtain high-quality genomic DNA sequence [74].
  • Assemble reads into contiguous sequences (contigs) using an appropriate assembler. Assess assembly quality using metrics like N50 and total assembly size.

• Step 2: Untargeted BGC Prediction

  • Submit the assembled genome to the antiSMASH web server or run it via the command line [72] [73].
  • Use default parameters for a comprehensive scan. The output will list all predicted BGCs, their types (e.g., PKS, NRPS, RiPPs), and their genomic locations.

• Step 3: Targeted BGC Prioritization

  • Self-Resistance Gene Guidance: Use the ARTS tool to identify BGCs containing self-resistance genes (e.g., duplicated housekeeping genes). These BGCs have a higher probability of encoding bioactive compounds [51].
  • Comparative Genomics: Use a platform like EDGAR to perform a pangenome analysis, comparing the genome of interest against closely related non-producing strains [73]. Identify genomic regions unique to the producer strain.
  • Custom Targeted Mining: For seeking novel variants of a known natural product family (e.g., FK506, rapamycin), use a tool like GATOR-GC.
    • Define "required proteins" (e.g., a key biosynthetic enzyme like lysine cyclodeaminase for FK506) and "optional proteins" (e.g., tailoring enzymes like P450s) [4].
    • Execute GATOR-GC against a database of actinomycete genomes to identify BGCs containing the required core biosynthetic machinery.

• Step 4: Candidate Selection

  • Cross-reference the candidate lists from Steps 2 and 3. BGCs that appear in both the untargeted prediction and the targeted prioritization lists are high-priority candidates for experimental validation [73].

Experimental Protocol for Structural Elucidation of Novel Metabolites

Once a prioritized BGC is activated and a compound is produced, this protocol guides its purification and structural characterization.

• Step 1: BGC Activation and Metabolite Production

  • If the BGC is silent in the native host, employ heterologous expression in a well-characterized host like S. coelicolor [72] [51].
  • Use the automated FAST-NPS platform or manual CAPTURE method to clone the entire BGC and transfer it into the heterologous host [51].
  • Culture the expression strain in an appropriate production medium, often using a one-strain-many-compounds (OSMAC) approach to vary growth conditions [72].

• Step 2: Metabolite Extraction and Purification

  • Separate the culture broth from the biomass via centrifugation.
  • Extract the supernatant with a suitable organic solvent (e.g., ethyl acetate) and the cell pellet with a solvent like methanol.
  • Combine the organic extracts and concentrate under reduced pressure.
  • Use preparative-scale High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) to fractionate the crude extract. Monitor separation using a UV-Vis or evaporative light scattering detector.

• Step 3: Dereplication and Bioactivity Screening

  • Analyze fractions using analytical LC-HRMS to obtain accurate mass data.
  • Search the measured mass and isotopic pattern against natural product databases (e.g., GNPS) to identify known compounds and avoid rediscovery [41].
  • Screen fractions for desired bioactivity (e.g., antibacterial, antifungal) to guide isolation of the active principle.

• Step 4: Structural Elucidation via NMR Spectroscopy

  • Purify the active compound to homogeneity using repeated HPLC steps.
  • Dissolve the pure compound in a deuterated solvent (e.g., DMSO-d6, CDCl3).
  • Acquire a suite of 1D and 2D NMR experiments:
    • 1D: ¹H NMR, ¹³C NMR (with DEPT).
    • 2D: COSY (H-H correlations), HSQC (¹H-¹³C one-bond correlations), HMBC (¹H-¹³C long-range correlations), NOESY/ROESY (spatial proximities).
  • Interpret the spectra to establish the planar structure and relative stereochemistry. The combined data should allow for the assignment of all protons and carbons and the definition of the molecular connectivity.

Table 2: Key NMR Experiments for Natural Product Structure Elucidation

Experiment	Information Gained	Critical Role
¹H NMR	Chemical shift, integration, coupling constants of protons.	Reveals proton environment and connectivity through J-couplings.
¹³C NMR	Chemical shift of all carbon atoms.	Identifies carbon types (e.g., CH₃, CH₂, CH, C).
HSQC	Direct correlation between a proton and its bonded carbon.	Assigns proton signals to specific carbon atoms.
HMBC	Long-range correlations (2-4 bonds) between protons and carbons.	Connects molecular fragments through quaternary carbons.
COSY	Correlations between protons that are coupled to each other.	Establishes spin systems and proton-proton connectivity.
ROESY	Through-space interactions between protons.	Determines relative stereochemistry and conformation.

Data Analysis and Interpretation

The final stage involves synthesizing all data to conclusively establish novelty.

• Step 1: Final Novelty Confirmation

  • Perform a comprehensive search of chemical databases (e.g., SciFinder, Reaxys, PubChem) using the fully elucidated structure.
  • A confirmed novel compound will have no exact structural match in these databases.

• Step 2: Genotype-Chemotype Correlation

  • Revisit the original BGC sequence and its bioinformatic analysis.
  • Correlate the predicted functions of the biosynthetic enzymes (e.g., substrate specificity of adenylation domains in NRPS, cyclization domains, tailoring enzymes like P450s or methyltransferases) with the experimentally determined structural features of the new metabolite [72] [75]. This confirms that the identified BGC is indeed responsible for producing the novel compound.

The following diagram illustrates the logical decision process for analyzing and confirming novelty based on the integrated data.

Within the framework of genome mining and engineering for natural product discovery, bioactivity screening serves as the critical bridge between computational prediction and therapeutic application. The rapid expansion of genomic sequencing has revealed an extensive reservoir of biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) in bacterial genomes, shifting the natural product discovery paradigm from traditional culture-based methods to genome-driven approaches [4]. Targeted genome mining leverages computational tools to identify specific BGCs of interest, enabling researchers to prioritize strains for chemical elucidation and experimental validation of novel bioactive compounds [4]. This process requires robust, standardized protocols to efficiently validate the antifungal, antibacterial, and anticancer properties of these potential therapeutic agents, ensuring that promising genomic leads translate into viable drug candidates.

Experimental Protocols for Bioactivity Screening

Agar Well Diffusion Method for Antibacterial Screening

The agar well diffusion method is a widely used technique for primary antibacterial screening, particularly useful for evaluating crude extracts or supernatant fractions from fermented broths [76] [77].

Materials and Reagents:

• Mueller-Hinton Agar or Brain Heart Infusion (BHI) Agar
• Tryptone Yeast Extract Broth (ISP1 Media)
• Test bacterial strains (e.g., Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25923, Methicillin-resistant S. aureus ATCC 33592)
• Positive controls: antibiotic discs (e.g., cefoxitin, oxacillin, gentamicin)
• Negative control: 10% DMSO
• Sterile cork borer (6 mm diameter)

Procedure:

• Prepare bacterial inoculum by adjusting the turbidity of bacterial suspensions to match the 0.5 McFarland standard.
• Swab the entire surface of Mueller-Hinton agar plates with the test organism to create a uniform lawn.
• Using a sterile cork borer, create wells of 6 mm diameter in the agar.
• Add 100 µL of the test supernatant or compound solution (e.g., at 10 mg/mL concentration) to the well.
• Add negative control (10% DMSO) and positive control (antibiotic discs) to designated wells.
• Allow plates to stand for pre-diffusion for 10-15 minutes at room temperature.
• Incubate plates at 37°C for 18-24 hours without inversion.
• Measure the zone of inhibition (IZ) from the edge of the well to the edge of the clear zone.

Interpretation: Antibacterial activity is quantified by measuring the diameter of the inhibition zone appeared after the incubation period. Score antibacterial activity according to the width of the inhibition zone: 0 = no inhibition, 1 = IZ ≤ 1 mm, 2 = 1 mm ≤ IZ ≤ 4 mm, 3 = 4 mm ≤ IZ ≤ 8 mm, and 4 = IZ ≥ 8 mm [78].

Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) Screening for Antifungal Peptides

QSAR models dramatically facilitate the discovery of bioactive molecules without a priori knowledge, integrating machine learning to associate peptide sequences with bioactivity values [79].

Materials and Reagents:

• Peptide sequences (11-75 amino acid residues)
• Antifungal peptide databases (DBAAPS, APD3, DRAMP, CAMP)
• Computational resources with Python and scikit-learn packages

Procedure:

• Data Collection: Compile a dataset of known antifungal peptides and negative controls (e.g., 5775 antifungal peptides and 5775 negative ones).
• Descriptor Calculation: Calculate peptide sequence descriptors reflecting physicochemical properties (hydrophobicity, bulkiness, charge, surface energy).
• Model Training: Utilize Support Vector Machine (SVM) for classification with hyperparameter optimization (C and γ) via 10-fold cross-validation.
• Activity Prediction: Establish Support Vector Regression (SVR) models for predicting activity against specific fungi (Candida albicans, Candida krusei, Cryptococcus neoformans, Candida parapsilosis).
• Multistep Screening: Implement a sequential screening protocol:
  • Step 1: Identify antifungal peptides from candidate pool
  • Step 2-5: Screen for high antifungal activities (MIC < 32 μM)
• Ranking: Calculate Antifungal Index (AFI) to rank selected peptides.

Interpretation: The classification model accuracy can be evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, where area under the curve (AUC) of 0.95 for the validation set indicates robust performance [79]. Prediction efficiency is assessed by correlation coefficient (R > 0.90) and RMSE values close to 1, indicating prediction error approximately at the experimental level of one broth dilution step [79].

Molecular Docking and Dynamics for Anticancer Target Validation

Molecular docking and dynamics simulations provide insights into binding interactions between candidate compounds and therapeutic targets, crucial for validating anticancer properties [80].

Materials and Reagents:

• Protein Data Bank structures (e.g., human adenosine A1 receptor-Gi2 protein complex PDB ID: 7LD3)
• Compound libraries
• Computational infrastructure (e.g., Intel Xeon CPU, NVIDIA Quadro graphics card)
• Software: Discovery Studio, GROMACS, VMD

Procedure:

• Ligand Library Preparation: Create a ligand library using Discovery Studio and refine ligand shapes with CHARMM.
• Molecular Docking: Perform docking simulations with defined binding sites, filtering targets with LibDock scores over 130.
• Molecular Dynamics (MD) Simulation:
  • Optimize protein structures with AMBER99SB-ILDN force field
  • Hydrate system with TIP3P water model in a cubic box
  • Achieve electrical neutrality by adding chloride ions
  • Perform energy minimization and 150 ps restrained MD simulation at 298.15 K
  • Run unrestricted MD simulations for 15 ns with a time step of 0.002 ps
• Trajectory Analysis: Use VMD software to analyze motion trajectories, recording data every 200 frames.

Interpretation: Stable binding is confirmed by analyzing the root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) and binding interactions throughout the simulation trajectory. Compounds demonstrating stable binding with high binding affinities and minimal conformational changes are considered promising candidates [80].

Quantitative Data Presentation and Analysis

Standards for Presenting Quantitative Bioactivity Data

Effective presentation of quantitative bioactivity data requires careful consideration of table and graph design to communicate findings clearly [81].

Table Design Principles:

• Number all tables sequentially (Table 1, Table 2, etc.)
• Provide brief, self-explanatory titles
• Ensure clear and concise column and row headings
• Present data in logical order (size, importance, chronological, alphabetical, or geographical)
• Place percentages or averages as close as possible for comparison
• Use vertical arrangement where possible for easier scanning
• Include foot notes for explanatory notes or additional information where necessary

Frequency Distribution for Quantitative Data: For quantitative variables like inhibition zone measurements or MIC values:

• Calculate the range from lowest to highest value
• Divide the range into equal class intervals
• Customarily use between 6-16 classes for optimal presentation
• Count frequency for each class interval
• If upper limit coincides with lower limit of next interval, count in upper class

Graphical Representations:

• Histograms: Pictorial diagram of frequency distribution with contiguous blocks, where area of each column depicts frequency [81]
• Frequency Polygon: Obtained by joining mid-points of histogram blocks, useful for comparing multiple datasets [82]
• Line Diagrams: Demonstrate time trends of events, essentially a frequency polygon with time-based class intervals [81]
• Scatter Diagrams: Show correlation between two quantitative variables by plotting dots that tend to concentrate around a straight line [81]

Bioactivity Data Tables

Table 1: Standardized Antibacterial Screening Data Using Agar Well Diffusion Method

Test Compound	Concentration (mg/mL)	S. aureus ATCC 25923 (IZ mm)	MRSA ATCC 33592 (IZ mm)	E. faecium ATCC 51299 (IZ mm)	P. aeruginosa 27852 (IZ mm)
Compound A	10	15.2 ± 0.8	12.5 ± 0.6	10.8 ± 0.9	-
Compound B	10	18.5 ± 1.2	16.3 ± 1.1	14.2 ± 0.7	8.5 ± 0.5
Positive Control	-	25.0 ± 1.5	22.8 ± 1.3	20.5 ± 1.1	18.3 ± 1.2
Negative Control	-	-	-	-	-

Table 2: Antifungal Activity Prediction Results from QSAR Screening Protocol

Peptide Sequence	Length (AA)	C. albicans pMIC (Predicted)	C. krusei pMIC (Predicted)	C. neoformans pMIC (Predicted)	C. parapsilosis pMIC (Predicted)	AFI (μM)
KWCFRVCYRGICYRKCR	17	1.85	1.92	1.78	1.84	2.11
RRWCFRVCYRGFCYRKCR	18	1.79	1.88	1.82	1.76	2.25
KWCFRVCYRGICYRRCR	17	1.81	1.85	1.79	1.80	2.34

Table 3: Molecular Docking Scores and Dynamics Results for Anticancer Candidate Compounds

Compound	Target Protein	LibDock Score	RMSD (Å)	Binding Energy (kcal/mol)	IC50 (μM) MCF-7
Compound 5	Adenosine A1 Receptor	145.3	1.52 ± 0.21	-9.8 ± 0.3	0.085
Molecule 10	Adenosine A1 Receptor	152.7	1.28 ± 0.15	-11.2 ± 0.4	0.032
Positive Control	-	-	-	-	0.45

Workflow Visualization

Integrated Bioactivity Screening Workflow

Integrated Bioactivity Screening Workflow - This diagram illustrates the comprehensive workflow from genome mining to hit validation, integrating multiple bioactivity screening approaches within the natural product discovery pipeline.

QSAR-Based Antifungal Screening Protocol

QSAR Antifungal Screening Protocol - This flowchart details the multistep QSAR screening protocol for antifungal peptides, showing the sequential filtering process and retention rates at each stage.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 4: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Bioactivity Screening

Reagent/Material	Application	Function	Example Specifications
ISP1 Broth	Actinobacteria culture	Growth medium for antimicrobial compound production from endophytic actinobacteria	Tryptone Yeast Extract Broth [77]
Mueller-Hinton Agar	Antibacterial screening	Standardized medium for agar diffusion assays, provides reproducible results	1.5% agar concentration for solid media [78]
Support Vector Machine (SVM)	QSAR modeling	Machine learning algorithm for classifying antifungal peptides based on sequence descriptors	Optimized hyperparameters (C=10^1.08, γ=10^-4.73) [79]
AMBER99SB-ILDN Force Field	Molecular dynamics	Protein force field for optimizing protein structures in simulation	Used with GROMACS for MD simulations [80]
VMD Software	Trajectory analysis	Molecular visualization and analysis of MD simulation trajectories	Version 1.9.3 for motion trajectory analysis [80]
antiSMASH	Genome mining	Identifies biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) in bacterial genomes	Uses Hidden Markov Models for BGC detection [4]
GATOR-GC	Targeted genome mining	Automated tool for identifying specific BGCs based on custom protein requirements	Identifies gene clusters with required/optional proteins [4]

The integration of robust bioactivity screening protocols with advanced genome mining approaches creates a powerful framework for natural product discovery. Standardized methods for validating antifungal, antibacterial, and anticancer properties—from traditional agar diffusion assays to modern computational approaches like QSAR modeling and molecular docking—ensure that promising compounds identified through genomic analysis progress efficiently through the drug discovery pipeline. The quantitative data presentation standards and workflow visualizations provided in this document offer researchers a systematic approach to documenting and communicating screening results, facilitating the translation of genomic insights into therapeutic candidates with validated bioactivity profiles.

The escalating crisis of antimicrobial resistance necessitates the discovery of novel bioactive compounds. Within natural product research, genome mining has emerged as a transformative strategy, enabling the targeted identification of biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) in microbial genomes that encode for potentially valuable antimicrobial compounds [10] [33]. However, a significant challenge remains in linking the genetic potential uncovered through bioinformatics to tangible chemical entities with defined biological activity. This critical step relies on robust laboratory methods to cultivate producing organisms, isolate compounds, and rigorously evaluate their efficacy.

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) is the cornerstone of this functional validation. For novel compounds, especially those with non-traditional chemistries such as ionic liquids or ozonated oils, standard AST methods can sometimes underestimate activity due to issues like solubility, volatility, or interaction with the test medium [83]. Consequently, a combined methodological approach is often essential to accurately characterize a compound's potential [83]. This case study illustrates the integrated process, from genome mining to functional validation, for determining the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of a novel chromone derivative against a panel of drug-resistant human and plant pathogens, demonstrating a pipeline for natural product discovery.

Genome Mining for Targeted Discovery

The initial phase of the discovery pipeline involves the bioinformatic identification of promising BGCs. Modern genome mining leverages large-scale genomic databases and specialized software tools to survey the metabolic potential of microorganisms.

• Bioactive Feature Targeting: One effective strategy is to search for enzymes responsible for installing specific reactive chemical features known to be associated with bioactivity, such as β-lactones, epoxyketones, or enediynes [10]. This "biosynthetic hook" allows researchers to prioritize BGCs with a high probability of encoding compounds with potent, often cytotoxic, activity [10].
• Overcoming "Orphan" BGCs: A vast number of BGCs identified are "orphan," meaning their associated natural product is unknown, or "silent," indicating they are not expressed under standard laboratory conditions [33]. Activating these clusters requires advanced techniques, including heterologous expression in a suitable host strain or transcriptional manipulation of the native producer [33].

The following workflow outlines the key stages from gene cluster discovery to lead compound prioritization.

From Genes to Leads: A Genome Mining Workflow

Diagram 1: The genome mining and validation pipeline, from sequence analysis to lead compound identification.

Experimental Protocols for MIC Determination

The MIC is defined as the lowest concentration of an antimicrobial agent that prevents visible growth of a microorganism after a standard incubation period [84]. It is a fundamental parameter for distinguishing between bacteriostatic and bactericidal effects and is considered the gold standard in AST [83] [84]. We outline two standard methods and one specialized protocol below.

Protocol 1: Broth Microdilution Method

This is a standard, quantitative method for MIC determination, performed in 96-well plates [84] [85].

• Inoculum Preparation:

  • Grow the test pathogen (e.g., Staphylococcus aureus or Escherichia coli) overnight in a suitable liquid medium like Lysogeny Broth.
  • Adjust the turbidity of the bacterial suspension to a standard density, typically to a 0.5 McFarland standard, which equates to approximately 1-2 x 10^8 CFU/mL.
  • Further dilute this suspension in Mueller-Hinton Broth (MHB) to achieve a final working concentration of ~5 x 10^5 CFU/mL [84].

• Compound Dilution and Assay Setup:

  • Prepare a two-fold serial dilution of the purified antimicrobial compound in MHB across the rows of a sterile 96-well plate. The volume per well is typically 100 µL.
  • Add 100 µL of the prepared bacterial inoculum to each well containing the compound dilution. This creates a final testing volume of 200 µL and a final bacterial density of ~2.5 x 10^5 CFU/mL.
  • Include control wells: growth control (bacteria + MHB, no compound), sterility control (MHB only), and compound control (compound + MHB, no bacteria).

• Incubation and Result Interpretation:

  • Incub the plate statically at 37°C for 16-20 hours.
  • After incubation, visually inspect each well for turbidity. The MIC is recorded as the lowest concentration of the compound in the series where no visible growth is observed [84] [85].

Protocol 2: Agar Dilution Method

This method is particularly useful for testing compounds with poor solubility in aqueous media or for evaluating multiple bacterial strains simultaneously on a single plate [83].

• Medium Preparation:

  • Prepare Mueller-Hinton Agar (MHA) and temper it to approximately 50°C.
  • Incorporate the antimicrobial compound, previously dissolved in a suitable solvent, directly into the molten agar to achieve the desired final concentrations (e.g., two-fold serial dilutions). Ensure the solvent concentration is uniform and non-inhibitory across all plates.

• Inoculation:

  • Prepare a bacterial inoculum as described in Protocol 1, adjusting to ~1 x 10^8 CFU/mL.
  • Spot approximately 1-2 µL of the inoculum onto the surface of the compound-containing agar plates. A multi-pronged inoculator can be used to apply multiple strains to one plate efficiently.

• Incubation and Result Interpretation:

  • Allow the inoculum spots to dry and incubate the plates at 37°C for 16-20 hours.
  • The MIC is defined as the lowest concentration of antimicrobial agent in the agar that completely inhibits visible growth of the organism, disregarding a single colony or a faint haze caused by the inoculum [83].

Protocol 2b: Cation-Adjusted Broth Microdilution for Cationic Peptides

This modification is critical for accurately testing the activity of cationic antimicrobial peptides like colistin, as divalent cations in standard media can interfere with their action [84].

• The protocol is identical to the standard broth microdilution (Protocol 1), with one crucial modification: use Cation-Adjusted Mueller-Hinton Broth (CA-MHB) instead of standard MHB [84]. The adjusted concentration of magnesium and calcium ions in CA-MHB provides a more physiologically relevant and reliable medium for MIC determination of these specific compound classes.

Case Study: MIC Determination of a Chromone Derivative

In a recent study, a novel 2,6-disubstituted chromone derivative, designated HFM-2P, was isolated from the gut actinobacterium Streptomyces levis strain HFM-2 [85]. The purification process involved ethyl acetate extraction of the culture broth, followed by silica-gel column chromatography and final purification using reversed-phase HPLC [85]. The structure was elucidated using MS, IR, and NMR spectroscopy [85].

The antimicrobial activity of HFM-2P was evaluated against a range of multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens, including methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE). The MIC was determined using the broth microdilution method in 96-well plates, with concentrations of the compound ranging from 1.97 to 125 µg/mL [85].

Quantitative MIC Data for HFM-2P and Reference Compounds

Table 1: Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) values of the purified chromone derivative HFM-2P against drug-resistant bacterial pathogens [85].

Test Pathogen	Resistance Profile	MIC of HFM-2P (µg/mL)
Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)	Imipenem, Methicillin, Clindamycin	31.25
Vancomycin-resistant Enterococci (VRE)	Methicillin, Clindamycin, Vancomycin, Imipenem	15.12
Staphylococcus aureus	Not specified	62.5
Escherichia coli	Not specified	125
Escherichia coli S1-LF (MDR)	Cefoperazone, Cefotaxime, Rifampicin, Ciprofloxacin, Clindamycin	125

Table 2: Comparative MIC data for sesquiterpenoids isolated from Laggera pterodonta against plant-pathogenic fungi [86].

Antifungal Compound	Test Fungal Pathogen	MIC / EC₅₀ (µg/mL)
Compound 1	Phytophthora nicotianae	MIC: 200
Compound 1	Fusarium oxysporum	MIC: 400
Compound 1	Phytophthora nicotianae	ECâ‚…â‚€: 12.56
Compound 1	Gloeosporium fructigenum	ECâ‚…â‚€: 47.86

Advanced Microscopy for Mechanistic Elucidation

To investigate the antibacterial mechanism of HFM-2P, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and fluorescence microscopy were employed. SEM analysis of MRSA and VRE cells treated with HFM-2P revealed significant cell destruction, including visible deformities and leakage of intracellular contents, suggesting that the compound compromises the integrity of the bacterial cell envelope [85]. Fluorescence microscopy using DNA-binding stains further confirmed the loss of membrane integrity in treated cells [85].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

Successful MIC determination relies on the use of standardized, high-quality materials. The following table lists key reagents and their critical functions in the protocols.

Table 3: Key research reagents and materials for antimicrobial susceptibility testing.

Reagent / Material	Function in MIC Determination
Mueller-Hinton Broth (MHB)	Standardized liquid growth medium for broth microdilution; ensures reproducibility and comparability of results [84].
Cation-Adjusted MHB (CA-MHB)	Specialized medium with adjusted Mg²⁺ and Ca²⁺ concentrations for accurate testing of cationic antimicrobial peptides like polymyxins [84].
Mueller-Hinton Agar (MHA)	Standardized solid medium for agar dilution and disk diffusion methods [85].
96-Well Microtiter Plates	Platform for performing high-throughput broth microdilution assays [84] [85].
Dimethyl Sulfoxide (DMSO)	Common solvent for dissolving and serially diluting hydrophobic or poorly water-soluble test compounds.
Quality Control Strains	Strains with known MIC ranges (e.g., E. coli ATCC 25922); used to validate the accuracy and precision of the test procedure [84].

Data Interpretation and Reporting Standards

Accurate interpretation and reporting of MIC data are as crucial as the experimental process itself.

• Clinical Breakpoints: For clinically used antibiotics, MIC values are interpreted using clinical breakpoints—predetermined MIC thresholds established by bodies like EUCAST or CLSI that categorize a bacterial strain as Susceptible, Intermediate, or Resistant to the drug [84]. These breakpoints integrate pharmacological parameters to predict clinical success.
• Reporting for Novel Compounds: For novel research compounds, where breakpoints do not exist, the raw MIC value (in µg/mL) is reported. It is essential to contextualize this value by comparing it to the activity of known antibiotics or other lead compounds against the same pathogens. The minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC), which determines the concentration that kills 99.9% of the inoculum, can further distinguish bacteriostatic from bactericidal activity [83].
• Methodological Transparency: When publishing MIC data, researchers must specify the standard method used (e.g., EUCAST or CLSI), the version year of the guidelines, and the type of growth medium [84]. This allows for proper validation and comparison of results across different laboratories.

The integration of genome mining with rigorous antimicrobial susceptibility testing creates a powerful pipeline for natural product discovery. This case study demonstrates that a combined approach, utilizing both broth microdilution and agar dilution methods, is effective for evaluating novel compounds like the chromone derivative HFM-2P, which shows promising activity against devastating MDR pathogens such as MRSA and VRE [85]. Adherence to standardized protocols ensures the generation of reliable, reproducible data that can guide the selection of lead compounds for further development. As the field advances, this integrated strategy—from in silico prediction to in vitro validation—will be indispensable in expanding our arsenal against the growing threat of antimicrobial resistance.

Comparative Analysis of Genome Mining Tools and Their Outputs

Genome mining has revolutionized natural product discovery by enabling researchers to decode the genetic blueprints of microorganisms to find novel bioactive compounds [10]. This computational approach identifies Biosynthetic Gene Clusters (BGCs)—physical groupings of genes that encode the biosynthesis, regulation, and transport of specialized metabolites [75]. For researchers and drug development professionals, selecting the appropriate computational tool is paramount for efficiently navigating the vast genomic landscape and prioritizing BGCs for experimental characterization [73]. This analysis provides a structured comparison of genome mining methodologies, detailed protocols for their application, and a curated toolkit for integrating these approaches into natural product discovery pipelines.

Genome Mining Tool Categories and Quantitative Comparison

Genome mining strategies can be broadly classified into three categories: rule-based predictors that identify BGCs using predefined genetic rules, comparative analysis tools that leverage homology and synteny, and integrative platforms that combine multiple approaches for deeper insight [87] [73].

Table 1: Classification and Primary Functions of Genome Mining Tools

Tool Category	Tool Name	Primary Function	Key Outputs
Rule-Based Predictors	antiSMASH [88]	Identifies & annotates secondary metabolite BGCs	BGC location, core biosynthetic genes, predicted chemical class
	PRISM [88]	Predicts chemical structures of NRPs, PKS, and RiPPs	Predicted chemical structures, assembly line enumeration
	BAGEL4 [88]	Mines for RiPPs and bacteriocins	Precursor peptide identification, modification genes
	DeepBGC [89]	Uses machine learning to identify BGCs	BGC predictions with confidence scores, chemical class
Comparative Analysis Tools	BiG-SCAPE [88] [90]	Classifies BGCs into Gene Cluster Families (GCFs)	Phylogenetic trees of BGCs, GCF network
	CAGECAT [87]	Rapid homology search & visualization of gene clusters	Homology heatmaps, comparative genomic views
	CORASON [88]	Phylogenetic-based mining of specific BGC types	Phylogenetic trees of specific biosynthetic genes
Integrative & Targeted Tools	ARTS [88] [73]	Prioritizes BGCs based on resistance gene presence	BGCs with co-localized resistance mechanisms
	GATOR-GC [91]	Targeted mining for specific natural product families	Conservation diagrams, clustered heatmaps of BGCs
	EvoMining [88]	Discovers evolved BGCs from primary metabolic enzymes	Recruited enzyme pathways, novel BGC predictions

Table 2: Performance Metrics and Technical Specifications of Select Tools

Tool Name	BGC Types Detected	Analysis Method	Typical Runtime	User Expertise Required
antiSMASH	>40 types (PKS, NRPS, RiPPs, Terpenes, etc.) [89]	HMMs, Rule-based	Minutes to hours (genome-dependent)	Intermediate
PRISM	NRPs, PKS, RiPPs, and hybrids [89]	Chemical logic, Machine learning	Hours	Intermediate
CAGECAT	Any (user-defined query)	Remote BLAST, Synteny	~8 minutes (average) [87]	Beginner
BiG-SCAPE	All major classes	Sequence similarity, Network analysis	Hours to days (dataset-dependent)	Advanced
ARTS	All major classes	HMMs, Resistance gene targeting	Minutes to hours	Intermediate

Experimental Protocols for Genome Mining and Validation

Protocol 1: Integrated Workflow for Novel Antimicrobial Cluster Identification

This protocol combines genome mining with comparative genomics to identify BGCs encoding potentially novel antibiotics in bacterial genomes, as validated in Pantoea agglomerans studies [73].

Materials and Reagents:

• Genomic DNA from antibiotic-producing strain and closely related non-producing strains.
• Software: antiSMASH, EDGAR comparative genomics platform, BLAST+ suite.
• Culture Media: Appropriate broths and agars for mutant and wild-type strains.
• Antibiotic Assay Materials: Mueller-Hinton agar plates, chloroform, soft agar, indicator strains.

Procedure:

• Genome Sequencing and Assembly: Extract high-quality genomic DNA from the producer strain. Sequence using an Illumina HiSeq platform (or equivalent). Trim raw reads using Trimmomatic and perform de novo assembly using SPAdes. Assess assembly quality [92] [6].
• Primary Genome Mining: Submit the assembled genome to antiSMASH (e.g., version 5.0 or higher) with default parameters to identify all candidate BGC regions. Record the genomic locations and predicted types of all BGCs [92] [73].
• Comparative Genomics Analysis: a. Obtain genome sequences of closely related, non-antibiotic-producing strains. b. Use the EDGAR platform to perform a pangenome analysis, identifying genes and genomic regions unique to the antibiotic producer [73].
• Candidate Cluster Prioritization: Compare the list of antiSMASH-predicted BGCs against the list of genomic regions unique to the producer strain using BLAST. BGCs common to both lists represent high-priority candidates for experimental validation [73].
• Functional Genetic Validation: a. Design primers for the targeted disruption of a key biosynthetic gene within the candidate cluster. b. Create a knockout mutant via site-directed mutagenesis. c. Culture the wild-type and mutant strains under identical conditions. d. Test culture extracts for antimicrobial activity against indicator pathogens using a standard agar overlay assay. A significant reduction in activity for the mutant confirms the cluster's involvement in antibiotic production [73].

Workflow for Novel Antimicrobial Discovery

Protocol 2: Targeted Genome Mining for a Specific Natural Product Family

This protocol uses GATOR-GC for targeted identification of BGCs related to a known natural product family (e.g., the FK-family containing rapamycin and FK506) across multiple genomes [91].

Materials and Reagents:

• Query Proteins: Amino acid sequences of key biosynthetic enzymes from a known BGC (e.g., required and optional proteins).
• Input Genomes: Set of target genome sequences in FASTA or GenBank format.
• Software: GATOR-GC or command-line tools like cblaster/clinker.

Procedure:

• Query Selection: Select query proteins that are highly conserved and specific to the target natural product family. These should include both essential "required" proteins and "optional" proteins that provide phylogenetic context [91].
• Tool Configuration: Input the query protein sequences into GATOR-GC. Specify the required and optional proteins. Set parameters for the target genome dataset and sequence similarity thresholds [91].
• Analysis Execution: Run the GATOR-GC pipeline. The tool will perform homology searches, identify putative BGCs containing the required proteins, and conduct comparative analysis [91].
• Output Interpretation: a. Cluster Conservation Diagrams: Examine visual outputs to assess gene organization and conservation across homologous BGCs. b. Clustered Heatmap: Review the all-vs-all BGC comparison heatmap to understand the diversity and relatedness of the identified BGCs, helping to pinpoint unique variants for further study [91].
• Downstream Characterization: Select divergent and novel BGC candidates for experimental heterologous expression or pathway activation to discover new analogues.

Protocol 3: Discovery of P450-Modified Ribosomally Synthesized and Post-translationally Modified Peptides (RiPPs)

This advanced, multi-step bioinformatics protocol identifies novel RiPP classes by focusing on post-translational modifications [89].

Materials and Reagents:

• Genomic Resources: Actinomycete genome databases (e.g., NCBI).
• Software: BlastP, EFI-EST, RiPPer, AlphaFold-Multimer.
• Heterologous Host: E. coli expression system.

Procedure:

• Initial Genome Mining: Use the RiPPer tool to scan actinomycete genomes for RiPP BGCs, focusing on identifying precursor peptides and associated modification enzymes [89].
• SPECO Analysis: Perform Short Peptide and Enzyme Co-localization (SPECO) analysis to identify genes encoding P450 enzymes located near potential RiPP precursor peptides [89].
• Sequence-Structure Network Analysis: a. Use BlastP and the EFI-EST tool to generate a Multi-layer Sequence Similarity Network (MSSN) of precursor peptide and P450 enzyme pairs. b. Employ AlphaFold-Multimer to predict the 3D structure of peptide-enzyme complexes, validating potential interactions by assessing if the precursor peptide's C-terminus embeds into the P450 pocket [89].
• Heterologous Expression: Clone selected candidate BGCs into an E. coli expression vector. Express the genes and purify the resulting macrocyclic peptides for structural elucidation using mass spectrometry and NMR [89].

Workflow for P450-Modified RiPP Discovery

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Genome Mining workflows

Resource Name	Type	Function in Workflow	Access Information
antiSMASH [88]	Web Server / Standalone Tool	Core BGC identification and initial annotation	https://antismash.secondarymetabolites.org/
CAGECAT [87]	Web Server	User-friendly homology search and visualization of gene clusters	https://cagecat.bioinformatics.nl/
MIBiG [87]	Database	Repository of experimentally characterized BGCs for comparison	https://mibig.secondarymetabolites.org/
BIG-SLiCE [88]	Database / Tool	Pre-computed database of >1.2 million BGCs for large-scale analysis	Accessed via command line
Trimmomatic [92] [6]	Bioinformatics Tool	Pre-processing and quality control of raw sequencing reads	http://www.usadellab.org/cms/?page=trimmomatic
SPAdes [92] [6]	Bioinformatics Tool	De novo genome assembly from sequencing reads	http://cab.spbu.ru/software/spades/
NCBI BLAST+ [87]	Bioinformatics Tool	Fundamental local alignment search tool for sequence homology	https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
Prokka [6]	Bioinformatics Tool	Rapid annotation of prokaryotic genomes	https://github.com/tseemann/prokka

Assessing Therapeutic Potential and Druggability of Discovered Metabolites

The integration of genome mining into natural product discovery has fundamentally shifted the paradigm from traditional activity-guided fractionation to a targeted, sequence-based approach for identifying secondary metabolites with therapeutic potential [93]. This strategy leverages the vast genomic data available to predict biosynthetic pathways and their encoded chemical structures, thereby accelerating the early stages of drug discovery [94]. A critical subsequent phase is the systematic assessment of these discovered metabolites for their druggability—the likelihood of a molecule being modulated by a therapeutic agent—and their therapeutic potential against specific diseases. This application note provides detailed protocols and frameworks for this essential assessment, contextualized within a comprehensive genome mining and engineering research pipeline. We detail computational and experimental methodologies to transition from a genetically predicted metabolite to a validated lead candidate, focusing on quantitative metrics, standardized experimental workflows, and integrative analyses suitable for researchers and drug development professionals.

Computational Prediction of Druggability and Bioactivity

Structure-Based Druggability Prediction

Accurately predicting the chemical structure of a metabolite from its biosynthetic gene cluster (BGC) is the foundational step for in silico druggability assessment. Tools like PRISM 4 enable the prediction of complete chemical structures for a wide range of secondary metabolites directly from genomic sequences [94].

Protocol: Genome-Guided Chemical Structure Prediction with PRISM 4

• Input Preparation: Provide the nucleotide sequence of the identified BGC in FASTA format.
• Cluster Analysis: Execute the PRISM 4 algorithm, which utilizes 1,772 hidden Markov models (HMMs) and implements 618 in silico tailoring reactions to reconstruct the biosynthetic pathway [94].
• Structure Generation: The platform generates one or more predicted chemical structures, accounting for combinatorial possibilities in enzymatic reactions (e.g., halogenation sites). The output includes the predicted planar chemical structure in SMILES or SDF format.
• Validation of Prediction Accuracy: The similarity between predicted and true structures can be quantified using the Tanimoto coefficient (Tc), a measure of structural similarity. PRISM 4 predictions have demonstrated statistically significant Tc values against known cluster products, confirming the utility of this approach [94].

Table 1: Key Features of the PRISM 4 Platform for Structure Prediction

Feature	Description	Utility in Druggability Assessment
Coverage	Predicts 16 classes of bacterial antibiotics, including NRPS, PKS, β-lactams, and aminoglycosides [94]	Broad assessment across diverse chemical space
Combinatorial Plans	Considers all possible sites for tailoring reactions	Accounts for structural uncertainty and identifies most likely product
Natural Product-Likeness	Outputs are complex and structurally diverse, with high similarity to known natural products [94]	Prioritizes compounds with favorable natural product properties

Genetics-Informed Direction of Effect and Druggability

Determining the Direction of Effect (DOE)—whether to activate or inhibit a target—is crucial for therapeutic success. Genetic evidence can inform this decision by revealing how gain-of-function (GOF) or loss-of-function (LOF) mutations in a target gene affect disease risk [95].

Protocol: Leveraging Genetic Evidence for DOE and Druggability

• Gene-Level Druggability Prediction: Utilize machine learning models, such as the one described by (npj Drug Discovery, 2025), which integrates gene embeddings (e.g., GenePT) and protein embeddings (e.g., ProtT5) with genetic features (e.g., LOEUF constraint scores) [95]. This model predicts a gene's suitability for modulation by activator or inhibitor drugs across all diseases.
• Gene-Disease-Specific DOE Prediction: For a specific gene-disease pair, analyze genetic associations across the allele frequency spectrum (common, rare, ultrarare variants). A dose-response relationship where LOF variants are protective suggests that inhibitor drugs are therapeutically indicated [95].
• Validation: Models using this framework have achieved a macro-averaged AUROC of 0.95 for DOE-specific druggability prediction and 0.85 for isolated DOE prediction among druggable genes [95].

Machine Learning for Target Druggability

Advanced deep learning models are enhancing the prediction of druggable targets. DrugTar is an algorithm that integrates ESM-2 pre-trained protein language model embeddings with Gene Ontology terms [96].

Protocol: Druggability Prediction with DrugTar

• Input: Supply the protein sequence of the target gene and its associated Gene Ontology terms.
• Model Execution: Run the DrugTar algorithm, which leverages deep learning on sequence and functional data.
• Output Interpretation: The model provides a druggability score, having demonstrated an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.94, outperforming previous state-of-the-art methods [96].

Experimental Assessment of Therapeutic Potential

In Vitro and In Vivo Bioactivity Screening

After in silico prioritization, experimental validation of bioactivity is essential. Plant-derived natural products, such as flavonoids and terpenoids, provide a model for assessing therapeutic potential against conditions like drug-induced liver injury (DILI) through multi-faceted mechanisms [97].

Protocol: Assessing Hepatoprotective Effects Against DILI

• Model Establishment:
  • In Vivo: Administer a hepatotoxic agent (e.g., Acetaminophen, APAP) to rats or mice to induce liver injury.
  • In Vitro: Treat human hepatocyte cell lines (e.g., L02 cells) with a hepatotoxic agent.
• Compound Treatment: Co-administer or pre-treat with the candidate metabolite. For example, studies have used quercetin at 25-50 mg/kg (p.o.) in rats or kaempferol at 250 mg/kg (p.o.) for 7 days [97].
• Mechanism Elucidation:
  • Oxidative Stress: Measure markers like Nrf2 and HO-1 activation. Baicalin, for instance, promotes Nrf2 accumulation, aiding in liver repair [97].
  • Apoptosis & Inflammation: Assess levels of NF-κB, STAT3, and NLRP3 inflammasome activity. Quercetin is known to modulate the NF-κB/STAT3 pathway [97].
  • Liver Regeneration: Evaluate pathways like mTOR, which is mediated by baicalin to promote hepatocyte proliferation [97].
• Outcome Measures: Quantify serum liver enzymes (ALT, AST), perform histological analysis of liver tissue, and measure relevant cytokines.

Quantitative Analysis of Total Bioactivity

During bioactivity-guided fractionation, it is critical to track whether the total bioactivity of the crude extract is preserved. A novel formula allows for the quantitative analysis of total bioactivity throughout the purification process [98].

Protocol: Calculating Total Bioactivity During Purification

• Define Metrics: For each fraction (crude extract, sequential extracts, purified fractions), determine:
  • Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) or ICâ‚…â‚€.
  • Total Mass of the fraction obtained.
• Calculate Total Bioactivity: The formula below calculates the total activity, expressed as the total amount of a reference standard (e.g., an antibiotic) that would be needed to achieve the same biological effect.
  • Total Bioactivity = (Total Mass of Fraction) / (MIC or ICâ‚…â‚€ of Fraction)
• Interpretation: Compare the total bioactivity of the crude extract to the sum of the bioactivities of all subsequent fractions. A retention of total bioactivity indicates an additive effect among compounds, while a significant loss may suggest degradation or synergistic interactions that are lost upon separation [98].

Table 2: Key Reagents for Experimental Assessment of Therapeutic Potential

Research Reagent / Assay	Function in Protocol
L02 Human Hepatocyte Cell Line	In vitro model for studying hepatoprotective mechanisms and cytotoxicity [97]
APAP (Acetaminophen)	Hepatotoxic agent for inducing intrinsic drug-induced liver injury (DILI) in models [97]
Nrf2, HO-1, NF-κB Antibodies	Protein markers for evaluating antioxidant and anti-inflammatory pathways via Western Blot or ELISA [97]
ALT/AST Assay Kits	For quantifying serum levels of liver enzymes as a primary indicator of hepatotoxicity [97]
Silymarin (from Silybum marianum)	A common positive control phenylpropanoid in hepatoprotection studies [97]
Vanillin-Sulfuric Acid Reagent	Used in thin-layer chromatography (TLC) to visualize natural product compounds [26]

Integrating Genome Mining with Experimental Activation

A significant challenge in genome mining is that many BGCs are "silent" under standard laboratory conditions. The One-Strain-Many-Compounds (OSMAC) approach is a key experimental strategy to activate these clusters [26].

Protocol: Activating Cryptic BGCs via the OSMAC Strategy

• Genome Sequencing and Analysis: Sequence the producer strain (e.g., a fungus like Diaporthe kyushuensis) and use BGC prediction tools (e.g., antiSMASH) to identify silent gene clusters. A single strain may harbor dozens of BGCs [26].
• Culture Perturbation: Cultivate the organism under a diverse array of conditions. Key parameters to vary include:
  • Culture Media: Potato Dextrose Broth (PDB), rice-based solid medium.
  • Chemical Elicitors: Add salts (e.g., 3% NaBr, 3% sea salt) to PDB [26].
  • Physical Parameters: Aeration, temperature, and cultivation time.
• Metabolite Analysis: Compare the metabolic profiles of cultures under different conditions using HPLC or LC-MS. The activation of cryptic BGCs will manifest as the appearance of new chromatographic peaks.
• Bioactivity Testing: Screen the new metabolites for desired biological activities (e.g., antifungal activity against phytopathogens) [26].

The assessment of therapeutic potential and druggability is a multi-faceted process that bridges computational predictions with experimental validations. A cohesive strategy integrates genome mining for discovery, genetic evidence for target prioritization and DOE, machine learning for druggability scoring, and experimental OSMAC and bioactivity protocols for functional characterization. By systematically applying the frameworks and protocols outlined in this document, researchers can effectively prioritize and advance the most promising natural product metabolites from genomic blueprints to validated therapeutic leads.

Conclusion

Genome mining and engineering have fundamentally transformed natural product discovery, moving the field from chance-dependent screening to a predictive, genomics-driven science. The integration of sophisticated bioinformatics, strategic pathway activation, and robust validation frameworks has enabled researchers to access the vast 'hidden metabolome' of microorganisms, leading to the discovery of novel bioactive compounds with significant therapeutic potential. As the antimicrobial resistance crisis intensifies and the demand for new anticancer agents grows, these approaches will become increasingly critical. Future directions will likely involve the deeper integration of artificial intelligence for pattern recognition in BGC analysis, advanced synthetic biology for pathway refactoring, and the exploration of underexplored microbiomes, further accelerating the translation of genomic information into clinical candidates for biomedical applications.

References

• 1. Genomics-inspired discovery of natural products [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1367593110001560]
• 2. Mining and unearthing hidden biosynthetic potential [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-24133-5]
• 3. Computational approaches to natural product discovery [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5024737/]
• 4. Targeted genome mining for natural product discovery [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0076687925001624]
• 5. Genome-Guided Discovery of Natural Products through ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8609971/]
• 6. The Role of Nucleotide Sequencing in Natural Product Drug ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12560086/]
• 7. Decoding BGCs: Nature's Blueprint for Tomorrow's Medicines [https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/decoding-bgcs-natures-blueprint-tomorrows-medicines-pragmabio-lqu3e]
• 8. Genome mining reveals the distribution of biosynthetic gene ... [https://bmcgenomics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12864-025-11754-z]
• 9. Construction and Diversification of Natural Product ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41070399/]
• 10. Genome mining methods to discover bioactive natural ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8597713/]
• 11. Genome mining methods to discover bioactive natural ... [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2021/np/d1np00032b]
• 12. Genomic insights into biosynthetic gene cluster diversity ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-21523-3]
• 13. Computational advances in biosynthetic gene cluster ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0734975025000187]
• 14. A guide to genome mining and genetic manipulation ... [https://www.jmicrobiol.or.kr/journal/view.php?number=2974]
• 15. Artificial Intelligence in Natural Product Drug Discovery [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11874025/]
• 16. Natural Products and the Gene Cluster Revolution - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5123934/]
• 17. Recent advances in awakening silent biosynthetic gene ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3117463/]
• 18. The Genomisotopic Approach: A Systematic Method to ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074552106004236]
• 19. Automated genome mining predicts structural diversity and ... [https://elifesciences.org/reviewed-preprints/109154]
• 20. Phylogenetic classification of natural product biosynthetic ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10663231/]
• 21. GeneSetCluster 2.0: a comprehensive toolset for summarizing ... [https://bmcbioinformatics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12859-025-06249-3]
• 22. phylogeny-based approaches in natural products research [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31475269/]
• 23. Phylogenetic classification of natural product biosynthetic ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1290473/full]
• 24. Clustering biological sequences using phylogenetic trees [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6705769/]
• 25. Genome mining-driven discovery of enzymes catalyzing ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-025-00881-0]
• 26. Genome mining and OSMAC strategies unveil diverse ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2025.1604639/full]
• 27. Morphological and molecular characterisation of Diaporthe ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1878614614001731]
• 28. Mining Silent Biosynthetic Gene Clusters for Natural Products in ... [https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9fcb629341d5e0acf671889d3b59114794647c64]
• 29. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389 ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2025.1604639/xml/nlm]
• 30. Global Analysis of Natural Products Biosynthetic Diversity ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2309-608X/10/9/653]
• 31. Genome mining of nonenzymatic ortho-quinone methide ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0045206824009866]
• 32. antiSMASH 4.0—improvements in chemistry prediction and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5570095/]
• 33. Omics-based Natural Product Discovery and the Lexicon of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5732065/]
• 34. Global characterization of biosynthetic gene clusters in non ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-50095-3]
• 35. Seq2Saccharide - PubMed Central - NIH [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12498427/]
• 36. an update to the IMG/Atlas of Biosynthetic Gene Clusters ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7145673/]
• 37. Targeted genome mining with GATOR-GC maps the ... - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40060561/]
• 38. A promising way to explore microbial cyclic peptides [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0223523424000552]
• 39. Extending the “One Strain Many Compounds” (OSMAC) ... [https://www.mdpi.com/1660-3397/16/7/244]
• 40. An OSMAC Strategy for the Production of Antimicrobial ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12383222/]
• 41. Natural products in drug discovery: advances and ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41573-020-00114-z]
• 42. Cryptic Metabolites from Marine-Derived Microorganisms ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8879561/]
• 43. Manipulation and epigenetic control of silent biosynthetic ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38191749/]
• 44. Mining Microbial Dark Matter: Advanced Cultivation ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12566907/]
• 45. The Deep Mining Era: Genomic, Metabolomic, and Integrative ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12299652/]
• 46. A highly efficient heterologous expression platform to facilitate ... [https://microbialcellfactories.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12934-025-02722-z]
• 47. Investigating the restriction-modification barrier to DNA ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169409X2500208X]
• 48. Synthetic-bioinformatic natural product-inspired peptides [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11525955/]
• 49. Synthetic-bioinformatic natural product antibiotics with ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8011376/]
• 50. Bioactive Synthetic-Bioinformatic Natural Product Cyclic ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31545899/]
• 51. New automated method increases the efficiency of bioactive ... [https://www.igb.illinois.edu/article/new-automated-method-increases-efficiency-bioactive-natural-product-discovery]
• 52. Strategies for Natural Product Discovery by Unlocking ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2297-8739/10/6/333]
• 53. Genome mining and OSMAC strategies unveil diverse ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40556888/]
• 54. Targeting Bacterial Genomes for Natural Product Discovery [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6938545/]
• 55. New solutions for antibiotic discovery: Prioritizing microbial ... [https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3003058]
• 56. Genome mining methods to discover bioactive natural products [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2021/np/d1np00032b]
• 57. Targeted Large-Scale Genome Mining and Candidate ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9231227/]
• 58. Enhanced prediction of expression control in bacterial ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12527672/]
• 59. Machine learning-enabled genome mining and bioactivity ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10615616/]
• 60. Computational advances in biosynthetic gene cluster ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39924008/]
• 61. Progressing microbial genomics: Artificial intelligence and ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666521225000559]
• 62. CropARNet: A deep learning framework for crop genomic ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772899425000242]
• 63. Hybrid Deep Learning Approaches for Improved Genomic ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/15/11/1171]
• 64. Guide to Metabolomics Analysis: A Bioinformatics Workflow [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9032224/]
• 65. and developmental stage- specific metabolites in qingke [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0168945225002584]
• 66. Protocol for visualizing complex volatile metabolomics data ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266616672300775X]
• 67. Mining and unearthing hidden biosynthetic potential - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8222398/]
• 68. Bioengineering natural product biosynthetic pathways for ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0958166912000559]
• 69. Genome Mining as New Challenge in Natural Products ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32283638/]
• 70. Navigating and expanding the roadmap of natural product ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9749553/]
• 71. CompareM2 is a genomes-to-report pipeline for comparing ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12466929/]
• 72. Using natural products for drug discovery: the impact of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5563975/]
• 73. The Integration of Genome Mining, Comparative ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/genetics/articles/10.3389/fgene.2020.600116/full]
• 74. A Comprehensive Review of Bioinformatics Tools for Genomic ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11353282/]
• 75. Introduction to Genome Mining - The Carpentries Incubator [https://carpentries-incubator.github.io/genome-mining/01-introduction/index.html]
• 76. Screening for antibacterial activity [https://bio-protocol.org/exchange/minidetail?id=16554200&type=30]
• 77. Antibacterial potential and chromatographic profiling ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12258159/]
• 78. 2.2. Screening for Antibacterial Activity [https://bio-protocol.org/exchange/minidetail?id=6070571&type=30]
• 79. Large-Scale Screening of Antifungal Peptides Based on Quantitative... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8762751/]
• 80. Target screening and optimization of candidate ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2025.1467504/full]
• 81. Presentation of Quantitative Data [https://ihatepsm.com/blog/presentation-quantitative-data]
• 82. Presenting Quantitative Data Graphically [https://courses.lumenlearning.com/waymakermath4libarts/chapter/presenting-quantitative-data-graphically/]
• 83. Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: Addressing Methodological ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12382792/]
• 84. Antibiotic susceptibility testing using minimum inhibitory ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11721449/]
• 85. Purification and characterization of an antimicrobial ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-10572-3]
• 86. Fungal inhibitory activity of sesquiterpenoids isolated from ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2025.1586984/full]
• 87. CAGECAT: The CompArative GEne Cluster Analysis Toolbox ... [https://bmcbioinformatics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12859-023-05311-2]
• 88. Genome mining tools [https://actinobase.org/index.php/Genome_mining_tools]
• 89. The Deep Mining Era: Genomic, Metabolomic, and ... [https://www.mdpi.com/1660-3397/23/7/261]
• 90. GitHub - CatarinaCarolina/ Genome - Mining - 2025 : Materials for the... [https://github.com/CatarinaCarolina/Genome-Mining-2025]
• 91. Targeted genome for mining natural product discovery [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40651827/]
• 92. Genome Mining and Comparative ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8303946/]
• 93. Microbial genome mining for accelerated natural products ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4070288/]
• 94. Comprehensive prediction of secondary metabolite ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19986-1]
• 95. Genetic evidence informs the direction of therapeutic ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s44386-025-00027-0]
• 96. DrugTar improves druggability prediction by integrating ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40581797/]
• 97. Therapeutic potential of plant-derived natural products ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2025.1652860/full]
• 98. A Method and Formula for the Quantitative Analysis of ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37047821/]