Research Area: Genetics

Matt Shoulders will lead an interdisciplinary team to improve RuBisCO — the photosynthesis enzyme thought to be the holy grail for improving agricultural yield.

Carolyn Blais | Abdul Latif Jameel Water and Food Systems Lab

May 10, 2023

According to MIT’s charter, established in 1861, part of the Institute’s mission is to advance the “development and practical application of science in connection with arts, agriculture, manufactures, and commerce.” Today, the Abdul Latif Jameel Water and Food Systems Lab (J-WAFS) is one of the driving forces behind water and food-related research on campus, much of which relates to agriculture. In 2022, J-WAFS established the Water and Food Grand Challenge Grant to inspire MIT researchers to work toward a water-secure and food-secure future for our changing planet. Not unlike MIT’s Climate Grand Challenges, the J-WAFS Grand Challenge seeks to leverage multiple areas of expertise, programs, and Institute resources. The initial call for statements of interests returned 23 letters from MIT researchers spanning 18 departments, labs, and centers. J-WAFS hosted workshops for the proposers to present and discuss their initial ideas. These were winnowed down to a smaller set of invited concept papers, followed by the final proposal stage.

Today, J-WAFS is delighted to report that the inaugural J-WAFS Grand Challenge Grant has been awarded to a team of researchers led by Professor Matt Shoulders and research scientist Robert Wilson of the Department of Chemistry. A panel of expert, external reviewers highly endorsed their proposal, which tackles a longstanding problem in crop biology — how to make photosynthesis more efficient. The team will receive $1.5 million over three years to facilitate a multistage research project that combines cutting-edge innovations in synthetic and computational biology. If successful, this project could create major benefits for agriculture and food systems worldwide.

“Food systems are a major source of global greenhouse gas emissions, and they are also increasingly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. That’s why when we talk about climate change, we have to talk about food systems, and vice versa,” says Maria T. Zuber, MIT’s vice president for research. “J-WAFS is central to MIT’s efforts to address the interlocking challenges of climate, water, and food. This new grant program aims to catalyze innovative projects that will have real and meaningful impacts on water and food. I congratulate Professor Shoulders and the rest of the research team on being the inaugural recipients of this grant.”

Shoulders will work with Bryan Bryson, associate professor of biological engineering, as well as Bin Zhang, associate professor of chemistry, and Mary Gehring, a professor in the Department of Biology and the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research. Robert Wilson from the Shoulders lab will be coordinating the research effort. The team at MIT will work with outside collaborators Spencer Whitney, a professor from the Australian National University, and Ahmed Badran, an assistant professor at the Scripps Research Institute. A milestone-based collaboration will also take place with Stephen Long, a professor from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The group consists of experts in continuous directed evolution, machine learning, molecular dynamics simulations, translational plant biochemistry, and field trials.

“This project seeks to fundamentally improve the RuBisCO enzyme that plants use to convert carbon dioxide into the energy-rich molecules that constitute our food,” says J-WAFS Director John H. Lienhard V. “This difficult problem is a true grand challenge, calling for extensive resources. With J-WAFS’ support, this long-sought goal may finally be achieved through MIT’s leading-edge research,” he adds.

RuBisCO: No, it’s not a new breakfast cereal; it just might be the key to an agricultural revolution

A growing global population, the effects of climate change, and social and political conflicts like the war in Ukraine are all threatening food supplies, particularly grain crops. Current projections estimate that crop production must increase by at least 50 percent over the next 30 years to meet food demands. One key barrier to increased crop yields is a photosynthetic enzyme called Ribulose-1,5-Bisphosphate Carboxylase/Oxygenase (RuBisCO). During photosynthesis, crops use energy gathered from light to draw carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere and transform it into sugars and cellulose for growth, a process known as carbon fixation. RuBisCO is essential for capturing the CO₂ from the air to initiate conversion of CO₂ into energy-rich molecules like glucose. This reaction occurs during the second stage of photosynthesis, also known as the Calvin cycle. Without RuBisCO, the chemical reactions that account for virtually all carbon acquisition in life could not occur.

Unfortunately, RuBisCO has biochemical shortcomings. Notably, the enzyme acts slowly. Many other enzymes can process a thousand molecules per second, but RuBisCO in chloroplasts fixes less than six carbon dioxide molecules per second, often limiting the rate of plant photosynthesis. Another problem is that oxygen (O₂) molecules and carbon dioxide molecules are relatively similar in shape and chemical properties, and RuBisCO is unable to fully discriminate between the two. The inadvertent fixation of oxygen by RuBisCO leads to energy and carbon loss. What’s more, at higher temperatures RuBisCO reacts even more frequently with oxygen, which will contribute to decreased photosynthetic efficiency in many staple crops as our climate warms.

The scientific consensus is that genetic engineering and synthetic biology approaches could revolutionize photosynthesis and offer protection against crop losses. To date, crop RuBisCO engineering has been impaired by technological obstacles that have limited any success in significantly enhancing crop production. Excitingly, genetic engineering and synthetic biology tools are now at a point where they can be applied and tested with the aim of creating crops with new or improved biological pathways for producing more food for the growing population.

An epic plan for fighting food insecurity

The 2023 J-WAFS Grand Challenge project will use state-of-the-art, transformative protein engineering techniques drawn from biomedicine to improve the biochemistry of photosynthesis, specifically focusing on RuBisCO. Shoulders and his team are planning to build what they call the Enhanced Photosynthesis in Crops (EPiC) platform. The project will evolve and design better crop RuBisCO in the laboratory, followed by validation of the improved enzymes in plants, ultimately resulting in the deployment of enhanced RuBisCO in field trials to evaluate the impact on crop yield.

Several recent developments make high-throughput engineering of crop RuBisCO possible. RuBisCO requires a complex chaperone network for proper assembly and function in plants. Chaperones are like helpers that guide proteins during their maturation process, shielding them from aggregation while coordinating their correct assembly. Wilson and his collaborators previously unlocked the ability to recombinantly produce plant RuBisCO outside of plant chloroplasts by reconstructing this chaperone network in Escherichia coli (E. coli). Whitney has now established that the RuBisCO enzymes from a range of agriculturally relevant crops, including potato, carrot, strawberry, and tobacco, can also be expressed using this technology. Whitney and Wilson have further developed a range of RuBisCO-dependent E. coli screens that can identify improved RuBisCO from complex gene libraries. Moreover, Shoulders and his lab have developed sophisticated in vivo mutagenesis technologies that enable efficient continuous directed evolution campaigns. Continuous directed evolution refers to a protein engineering process that can accelerate the steps of natural evolution simultaneously in an uninterrupted cycle in the lab, allowing for rapid testing of protein sequences. While Shoulders and Badran both have prior experience with cutting-edge directed evolution platforms, this will be the first time directed evolution is applied to RuBisCO from plants.

Artificial intelligence is changing the way enzyme engineering is undertaken by researchers. Principal investigators Zhang and Bryson will leverage modern computational methods to simulate the dynamics of RuBisCO structure and explore its evolutionary landscape. Specifically, Zhang will use molecular dynamics simulations to simulate and monitor the conformational dynamics of the atoms in a protein and its programmed environment over time. This approach will help the team evaluate the effect of mutations and new chemical functionalities on the properties of RuBisCO. Bryson will employ artificial intelligence and machine learning to search the RuBisCO activity landscape for optimal sequences. The computational and biological arms of the EPiC platform will work together to both validate and inform each other’s approaches to accelerate the overall engineering effort.

Shoulders and the group will deploy their designed enzymes in tobacco plants to evaluate their effects on growth and yield relative to natural RuBisCO. Gehring, a plant biologist, will assist with screening improved RuBisCO variants using the tobacco variety Nicotiana benthamianaI, where transient expression can be deployed. Transient expression is a speedy approach to test whether novel engineered RuBisCO variants can be correctly synthesized in leaf chloroplasts. Variants that pass this quality-control checkpoint at MIT will be passed to the Whitney Lab at the Australian National University for stable transformation into Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco), enabling robust measurements of photosynthetic improvement. In a final step, Professor Long at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign will perform field trials of the most promising variants.

Even small improvements could have a big impact

A common criticism of efforts to improve RuBisCO is that natural evolution has not already identified a better enzyme, possibly implying that none will be found. Traditional views have speculated a catalytic trade-off between RuBisCO’s specificity factor for CO₂ / O₂ versus its CO₂ fixation efficiency, leading to the belief that specificity factor improvements might be offset by even slower carbon fixation or vice versa. This trade-off has been suggested to explain why natural evolution has been slow to achieve a better RuBisCO. But Shoulders and the team are convinced that the EPiC platform can unlock significant overall improvements to plant RuBisCO. This view is supported by the fact that Wilson and Whitney have previously used directed evolution to improve CO₂ fixation efficiency by 50 percent in RuBisCO from cyanobacteria (the ancient progenitors of plant chloroplasts) while simultaneously increasing the specificity factor.

The EPiC researchers anticipate that their initial variants could yield 20 percent increases in RuBisCO’s specificity factor without impairing other aspects of catalysis. More sophisticated variants could lift RuBisCO out of its evolutionary trap and display attributes not currently observed in nature. “If we achieve anywhere close to such an improvement and it translates to crops, the results could help transform agriculture,” Shoulders says. “If our accomplishments are more modest, it will still recruit massive new investments to this essential field.”

Successful engineering of RuBisCO would be a scientific feat of its own and ignite renewed enthusiasm for improving plant CO₂ fixation. Combined with other advances in photosynthetic engineering, such as improved light usage, a new green revolution in agriculture could be achieved. Long-term impacts of the technology’s success will be measured in improvements to crop yield and grain availability, as well as resilience against yield losses under higher field temperatures. Moreover, improved land productivity together with policy initiatives would assist in reducing the environmental footprint of agriculture. With more “crop per drop,” reductions in water consumption from agriculture would be a major boost to sustainable farming practices.

“Our collaborative team of biochemists and synthetic biologists, computational biologists, and chemists is deeply integrated with plant biologists and field trial experts, yielding a robust feedback loop for enzyme engineering,” Shoulders adds. “Together, this team will be able to make a concerted effort using the most modern, state-of-the-art techniques to engineer crop RuBisCO with an eye to helping make meaningful gains in securing a stable crop supply, hopefully with accompanying improvements in both food and water security.”

"It simply changed the way that people thought that biology could be done."

Ed Cara | Gizmodo

April 11, 2023

On April 14 2003, scientists announced the end to one of the most remarkable achievements in history: the first (nearly) complete sequencing of a human genome. It was the culmination of a decade-plus endeavor that involved thousands of scientists across the globe. Many people hoped the accomplishment would change the world for the better.

For the 20-year anniversary of this historic event, we took a look back at the Human Genome Project and its impact. How did it shape science moving forward? How many of the expected goals have been reached since? And what lies ahead for the study of genetics?

A genome is the entire set of genetic information that makes up an organism. This information is packaged into sequences of DNA we call genes, which in humans are spread along 23 pairs of chromosomes. Only a small portion of these genes contain the instructions for coding the many proteins essential for life, but much of the rest is still thought to be important to our functioning. As scientists would eventually confirm, one copy of the human genome has around 3 billion base pairs of DNA. The sheer magnitude of the effort needed to map all this wasn’t lost on the researchers involved in the project, especially given the technology available decades ago.

“There’s been lots of analogies that people have put forward—like us being Lewis and Clark. We didn’t really have a map,” said Richard Gibbs, founder and director of the Baylor College of Medicine Human Genome Sequencing Center in Texas, one of the major institutions involved in the project.

Gibbs and his many colleagues knew they had to make compromises. Despite the advancements in sequencing technology since the official start of the project in 1990, they couldn’t fill in every gap with their current tools. And the first human genome was a composite of several blood donors in the U.S., not a single person. Along the way, private company Celera entered the picture, promising that it would complete a separate genome project using its own techniques even faster. Ultimately, both groups finished ahead of schedule around the same time, with the first draft sequences released in 2000, though Celera announced its success a few months earlier.

Regardless of the victor, the feat certainly did usher in a new era of genetics research—one that has seen great leaps in speed and efficiency since 2003.

“I think the very most important accomplishment in the past 20 years has been the advent of next-generation sequencing. The ability to perform sequencing in a massively parallel way, so that you could do it far more quickly and cheaply,” said Stacey Gabriel, director of the Genomics Platform at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, another major research site involved in the Human Genome Project. “And that has come with all of the associated advancement in our computational abilities, too, to really be able to take that data and analyze it at a massive scale as well.”

The original project cost $2.7 billion, with most of the genome being mapped over a two-year span. Nowadays, the current speed record for sequencing a genome is around five hours (more often, though, it takes weeks), and this past fall, the company Illumina unveiled a machine that it claims will cost as little as $200 per sequence, down from the recently typical $600 cost.

Greg Findlay leads the Genome Function Laboratory at the Francis Crick Institute in the UK. His team is one of many around the world that is building on the work of the original project. They’re currently trying to identify and understand how certain variants in tumor-suppressor genes can raise our risk of cancer.

“So what my lab tries to do is actually understand what variants do to the genome. That is, we want to know exactly which variants cause disease and why they cause disease. Right now, we’re focused on certain genetic changes that lead to cancer, and I think this particular field has really been revolutionized by the Human Genome Project,” Findlay said. “We now know there are many, many different genetic paths by which cells can turn into cancer. And we know this, because we’ve been able to actually sequence the DNA in so many different tumors repeatedly, across all different types of cancer, to see what are the mutations that actually lead to cancer forming.”

Perhaps equally important was the project’s impact on scientific collaboration. The effort directly led to an international agreement meant to ensure open access to DNA sequences. It also made clear that great things could be possible when large groups of scientists worked together, according to Gibbs.

“It simply changed the way that people thought that biology could be done,” he said. “It built a model for team science that was not there before.”

Even at the time, though, the project knowingly left some things unfinished. They had mapped roughly 92% of the genome by 2003, but it would take almost 20 more years for other scientists to track down the remaining 8%. This missing “dark matter” of our genome could very well provide new clues about how humans evolved or our susceptibility to various diseases.

Much of the genetic information collected and analyzed since the project ended has come from white and European populations—a disparity that hampers our ability to truly understand the impact of genetics on everyone’s health. But scientists today are working on bridging that gap through initiatives like the Human Pangenome Project, which will sequence and make available the full genomes of over 300 people intended to represent the breadth of human diversity around the globe.

“There’s genetic variation that exists across all the world’s populations. And if you only use variations from a sliver of the world’s populations, and you try to apply that to everybody else, it just doesn’t work very well, because we all have different backgrounds,” said Lucinda Antonacci-Fulton, one of the project’s coordinators and director of project development & new initiatives at Washington University in St. Louis’s McDonnell Genome Institute. “So the more inclusive you can be, the better off you are in terms of treatments that you want to bring into the clinic.”

As important as genetics research has been, some of the expectations fueled by the Human Genome Project likely were too lofty. In 2000, for instance, President Bill Clinton claimed that the project would “revolutionize the diagnosis, prevention and treatment of most, if not all, human diseases.” While we do continue to discover new gene variants that strongly predict the odds of developing a specific disease or trait, there are countless others that we’re still in the dark about. Elsewhere, it’s become clear that our genome often only plays a small or negligible role in why we get sick or experience something in a particular manner. So although the project has helped unlock some of the mysteries of the world, there are so many more questions out there about why we are the way we are, and our genes are probably not going to provide a neat answer to many of them.

“I think where things are oversold, sometimes, is with this notion that just because the human genome is done, you’re going to be able to read it off for some sort of deterministic answer—where finding genes for disease becomes like falling off a log,” Gabriel notes. “But often human disease, especially the diseases that impact us the most, these are not simple genetic diseases. They’re multifactorial. They’re combinations of your genes, your behavior, exposure to the environment, sometimes just bad luck.”

None of this is to sell short the potential of genetics. Hans Lehrach, a former director at the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics in Germany, was one of the first researchers involved in the Human Genome Project. He’s also one of many scientists who believe that we’ll someday be able to cheaply and easily scan a person’s genome at a moment’s notice and that this information, along with other aspects of our molecular make-up, will help guide the specific drugs or interventions doctors prescribe—a concept known as personalized medicine. Notably, the treatment of some cancers is already influenced by the variants that underlie their growth. Some experts even argue that widespread whole genome sequencing should start as early as birth, and there are already small-scale programs in the U.S., UK, and elsewhere testing out its potential benefits and risks.

“Not knowing about your genome is a bit like crossing the street while closing your eyes because you don’t want to see a bus coming. If we don’t sequence our genomes, the buses keep coming anyway—it just lets us open our eyes and maybe see the kind of danger that we can escape or do something about,” Lehrach said.

The Human Genome Project truly has changed the scientific landscape, but we’re still only at the very beginning of seeing the world that it’s made possible.