Functional Characterization of the STR3 Promoter under Exposure to the Pesticide Pyrimethanil: A Potential Tool for Environmental Monitoring
Authors
-
Fernando A. Gonzales-Zubiate
School of Biological Sciences and Engineering, Yachay Tech University, 100119, Urcuqui, Ecuador 2 MIND Research Group, Model Intelligent Networks Development, Urcuqui, Ecuador
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9519-4079
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70099/BJ/2025.02.04.20Keywords:
pyrimethanil, gene expression, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, sustainable environmentAbstract
The widespread use of fungicides in modern agriculture has intensified concerns about their ecological and toxicological impacts. At the same time, the lack of rapid, cost-effective detection methods continues to hinder routine monitoring of pesticide residues. Saccharomyces cerevisiae, with its well-characterized genetics and conserved stress-response pathways, offers a powerful platform for developing molecular biosensors. Previous transcriptomic studies have shown that exposure to the anilinopyrimidine fungicide pyrimethanil induces extensive transcriptional reprogramming in yeast, particularly affecting sulfur amino acid metabolism and associated stress-response networks. Among the most strongly upregulated genes is STR3, encoding cystathionine β-lyase, suggesting its potential as a sensitive reporter of fungicide-induced stress.In this study, we constructed and validated a promSTR3::GFP reporter system to monitor STR3 transcriptional activation in response to pyrimethanil exposure. Our results demonstrate a clear dose- and time-dependent increase in GFP fluorescence, accurately reflecting the physiological and metabolic disruption caused by the fungicide. This reproducible activation pattern highlights the STR3 promoter as a promising molecular sensing element for the design of yeast-based biosensors.
Overall, our findings advance the understanding of cellular responses to pesticide stress in S. cerevisiae and substantiate the feasibility of leveraging promoter-reporter systems as low-cost, scalable tools for environmental and agricultural monitoring of fungicide contamination.
References
1. Mollocana Lara EC, Gonzales-Zubiate FA. Control of pesticides in Ecuador: An underrated problem? Bionatura. 2020;5(3):1257–63. doi:10.21931/RB/2020.05.03.17
2. Tsalidis GA. Human health and ecosystem quality benefit from life cycle assessment due to the elimination of fungicides in agriculture. Sustainability. 2022;14(2):846. doi:10.3390/su14020846
3. Rosslenbroich HJ, Stuebler D. Botrytis cinerea—history of chemical control and novel fungicides for its management. Crop Prot. 2000;19(8):557–61. doi:10.1016/S0261-2194(00)00072-7
4. Shao W, Zhao Y, Ma Z. Advances in understanding fungicide resistance in Botrytis cinerea in China. Phytopathology. 2021;111(3):455–63. doi:10.1094/PHYTO-07-20-0313-IA
5. Eberlin AR, Frampton CS. A metastable polymorphic form of the antifungal anilinopyrimidine pyrimethanil. Acta Crystallogr E Crystallogr Commun. 2017;73:886–9. doi:10.1107/S2056989017007563
6. Cabras P, Angioni A, Garau VL, Melis M, Pirisi FM, Minelli EV, et al. Fate of new fungicides (cyprodinil, fludioxonil, pyrimethanil, and tebuconazole) from vine to wine. J Agric Food Chem. 1997;45(7):2708–10. doi:10.1021/jf960939x
7. Chen Z, Dong X, Liu C, Wang S, Dong S, Huang Q. Rapid detection of residual chlorpyrifos and pyrimethanil on fruit surfaces using surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy integrated with deep learning. Sci Rep. 2023;13:45954. doi:10.1038/s41598-023-45954-y
8. Lloyd AW, Percival D, Langille MGI, Yurgel SN. Changes to soil microbiome resulting from synergistic effects of fungistatic compounds pyrimethanil and fluopyram in lowbush blueberry agriculture. Microorganisms. 2023;11(2):410. doi:10.3390/microorganisms11020410
9. Cus F, Raspor P. Effect of pyrimethanil on the growth of wine yeasts. Lett Appl Microbiol. 2008;47(1):54–9. doi:10.1111/j.1472-765X.2008.02383.x
10. Eastabrook CL, Maqueda MM, Vagg C, Idomeh J, Nasif-Whitestone TA, Lawrence P, et al. Determining toxicity and environmental transport potential of pyridine using the brown crab Cancer pagurus. bioRxiv. 2022;516169. doi:10.1101/2022.11.17.516169
11. Bernabò I, Guardia A, Macirella R, Tripepi S, Brunelli E. Chronic exposure to the fungicide pyrimethanil: Multi-organ effects in the Italian tree frog (Hyla intermedia). Sci Rep. 2017;7:7367. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-07367-6
12. Meng Y, Zhong K, Xiao J, Huang Y, Wei Y, Tang L, et al. Developmental and cardiotoxic effects of pyrimethanil in zebrafish. Chemosphere. 2020;255:126889. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.126889
13. Shinn C, Delello-Schneider D, Mendes LB, Sanchez AL, Müller R, Espíndola ELG, Araújo CVM. Immediate and mid-term effects of pyrimethanil toxicity on microalgae under episodic contamination. Chemosphere. 2015;120:407–13. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.08.023
14. Aleksić M, Stanisavljević D, Smiljković M, Vasiljević P, Stevanović M, Soković M, et al. Pyrimethanil: Effective fungicide against Aspergillus rot on cherry tomato but cytotoxic to human cell lines. Ann Appl Biol. 2019;175(2):228–35. doi:10.1111/aab.12532
15. Giaever G, Chu AM, Ni L, Connelly C, Riles L, Véronneau S, et al. Functional profiling of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome. Nature. 2002;418:387–91. doi:10.1038/nature00935
16. Sanchez BJ, Nielsen J. Genome-scale models of yeast: Toward standardized evaluation and multi-omic integration. Integr Biol. 2015;7(8):846–58. doi:10.1039/C5IB00083A
17. Pagano L, Caldara M, Villani M, Zappettini A, Marmiroli N, Marmiroli M. In vivo–in vitro comparative toxicology of cadmium sulphide quantum dots in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nanomaterials. 2019;9(4):512. doi:10.3390/nano9040512
18. Vanderwaeren L, Dok R, Voordeckers K, Nuyts S, Verstrepen KJ. Saccharomyces cerevisiae as a model for eukaryotic cell biology, from cell-cycle control to DNA-damage response. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23(19):11665. doi:10.3390/ijms231911665
19. Gillham R. Changes in mammalian abundance through the Eocene–Oligocene climate transition in the White River Group of Nebraska, USA [dissertation]. University of Nebraska–Lincoln; 2019.
20. Mendes F, Miranda E, Amaral L, Carvalho C, Castro BB, Sousa MJ, Chaves SR. Novel yeast-based biosensor for environmental monitoring of tebuconazole. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2024;108(1):10. doi:10.1007/s00253-023-12944-z
21. Gil FN, Becker JD, Viegas CA. Potential mechanisms underlying pyrimethanil response in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: Gene expression profiling. J Agric Food Chem. 2014;62(23):5237–47. doi:10.1021/jf5007775
22. Thomas D, Surdin-Kerjan Y. Metabolism of sulfur amino acids in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 1997;61(4):503–32. doi:10.1128/mmbr.61.4.503–532.1997
23. Aitken SM, Lodha PH, Morneau DJK. Enzymes of the transsulfuration pathways: Active-site characterizations. Biochim Biophys Acta Proteins Proteom. 2011;1814(11):1511–7. doi:10.1016/j.bbapap.2011.03.006
24. Hansen J, Johannesen PF. Cysteine is essential for transcriptional regulation of sulfur assimilation genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Gen Genet. 2000;263:535–42. doi:10.1007/s004380051199
25. Sherman F. Getting started with yeast. Methods Enzymol. 2002;350:3–41. doi:10.1016/S0076-6879(02)50954-X
26. Green MR, Sambrook J. Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual. 4th ed. Cold Spring Harbor (NY): Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 2012.
27. Niedenthal RK, Riles L, Johnston M, Hegemann JH. GFP as a reporter for gene expression and subcellular localization in budding yeast. Yeast. 1996;12(8):773–86. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0061(19960630)12:8<773::AID-YEA972>3.0.CO;2-L
28. Costa ACT, Russo M, Fernandes AAR, Broach JR, Fernandes PMB. Transcriptional response of multi-stress-tolerant Saccharomyces cerevisiae to sequential stresses. Fermentation. 2023;9:195. doi:10.3390/fermentation9020195
29. Mat Nanyan NS, Takagi H. Proline homeostasis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: How does the stress-responsive transcription factor Msn2 play a role? Front Genet. 2020;11:438. doi:10.3389/fgene.2020.00438
30. Martin-Yken H. Yeast-based biosensors: Current applications and new developments. Biosensors. 2020;10:51. doi:10.3390/bios10050051.
31. Tang H, Wu Y, Deng J, Chen N, Zheng Z, Wei Y, et al. Promoter architecture and promoter engineering in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Metabolites. 2020;10:320. doi:10.3390/metabo10080320.
32. Edwards H, Yang Z, Xu P. Characterization of Met25 as a color-associated genetic marker in Yarrowia lipolytica. Metab Eng Commun. 2020;11:e00147. doi:10.1016/j.mec.2020.e00147.
33. Vopálenská I, Váchová L, Palková Z. New biosensor for detection of copper ions in water based on immobilized genetically modified yeast cells. Biosens Bioelectron. 2015;72:160–167. doi:10.1016/j.bios.2015.05.006.
34. Wahid E, Ocheja OB, Marsili E, Guaragnella C, Guaragnella N. Biological and technical challenges for implementation of yeast-based biosensors. Microb Biotechnol. 2023;16(1):54–66. doi:10.1111/1751-7915.14183.
35. Žunar B, Mosrin C, Bénédetti H, Vallée B. Re-engineering of CUP1 promoter and Cup2/Ace1 transactivator to convert Saccharomyces cerevisiae into a whole-cell eukaryotic biosensor capable of detecting 10 nM copper. Biosens Bioelectron. 2022;214:114502. doi:10.1016/j.bios.2022.114502.
36. Nemer G, Koubaa M, El Chamy L, Maroun RG, Louka N. Seeing colors: A literature review on colorimetric whole-cell biosensors. Fermentation. 2024;10:79. doi:10.3390/fermentation10020079.
37. Nisamedtinov I, Lindsey GG, Karreman R, Orumets K, Koplimaa M, Kevvai K, et al. The response of Saccharomyces cerevisiae to sudden vs. gradual environmental stress monitored by Hsp12p expression. FEMS Yeast Res. 2008;8(6):829–838. doi:10.1111/j.1567-1364.2008.00391.x.
38. Antonazzi F, Di Felice F, Camilloni G. GCN5 enables HSP12 induction promoting chromatin remodeling, not histone acetylation. Biochem Cell Biol. 2021;99(6):700–706. doi:10.1139/bcb-2020-0620.
39. Temelli N, van den Akker S, Weusthuis RA, Bisschops MMM. Exploring yeast energy dynamics: The general stress response lowers maintenance energy requirement. Microb Biotechnol. 2025;18(4):e70126. doi:10.1111/1751-7915.70126.
40. Zhang M-L, Zhang H, He Y-X, Wu Z-H, Xu K. Improving thermo-tolerance of Saccharomyces cerevisiae by precise regulation of small HSP expression. RSC Adv. 2023;13:36254–36260. doi:10.1039/D3RA05216H.
41. Dacquay LC, McMillen DR. Improving the design of an oxidative-stress-sensing biosensor in yeast. FEMS Yeast Res. 2021;21(4):foab025. doi:10.1093/femsyr/foab025.
42. Zhang Y, Shi S. Transcription factor-based biosensor for dynamic control in yeast for natural product synthesis. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2021;9:635265. doi:10.3389/fbioe.2021.635265.
43. Mendes F, Machado BO, Castro BB, et al. Harnessing the power of biosensors for environmental monitoring of pesticides in water. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2025;109:92. doi:10.1007/s00253-025-13461-x.
44. Gutiérrez JC, Amaro F, Díaz S, Martín-González A. Environmental biosensors: A microbiological view. In: Thouand G, editor. Handbook of Cell Biosensors. Cham: Springer; 2022. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-23217-7_191.
45. Cheliukanov M, Gurkin G, Perchikov R, Medvedeva A, Lavrova T, Belousova T, et al. Whole-cell microorganisms as bioanalytical tools for pollution monitoring: A review. Biosensors. 2025;15:290. doi:10.3390/bios15050290.
46. Fan C, He N, Yuan J. Cascaded amplifying circuit enables sensitive detection of fungal pathogens. Biosens Bioelectron. 2024;250:116058. doi:10.1016/j.bios.2024.116058.
47. Sheikhi R, Dehghani MH, Nabizadeh R, Mahvi AH, Naddafi K, Ahmadikia K. Developing a Saccharomyces cerevisiae-based cytotoxicity bioassay for assessing contaminated waters. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2025;299:118407. doi:10.1016/j.ecoenv.2025.118407.
48. Ocheja OB, Wahid E, Franco JH, Trotta M, Guaragnella C, Marsili E, et al. Polydopamine-immobilized yeast cells for portable electrochemical copper biosensors. SSRN. 2023. doi:10.2139/ssrn.4647249.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with BioNatura Journal agree to the following terms: Authors retain copyright and grant the BioNatura Institutional Publishing Consortium (BIPC) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
