33
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Not your ordinary yeast: non-Saccharomycesyeasts in wine production uncovered

      1 , 2 ,   3
      FEMS Yeast Research
      Wiley

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Saccharomyces cerevisiae and grape juice are 'natural companions' and make a happy wine marriage. However, this relationship can be enriched by allowing 'wild' non-Saccharomyces yeast to participate in a sequential manner in the early phases of grape must fermentation. However, such a triangular relationship is complex and can only be taken to 'the next level' if there are no spoilage yeast present and if the 'wine yeast' - S. cerevisiae - is able to exert its dominance in time to successfully complete the alcoholic fermentation. Winemakers apply various 'matchmaking' strategies (e.g. cellar hygiene, pH, SO2 , temperature and nutrient management) to keep 'spoilers' (e.g. Dekkera bruxellensis) at bay, and allow 'compatible' wild yeast (e.g. Torulaspora delbrueckii, Pichia kluyveri, Lachancea thermotolerans and Candida/Metschnikowia pulcherrima) to harmonize with potent S. cerevisiae wine yeast and bring the best out in wine. Mismatching can lead to a 'two is company, three is a crowd' scenario. More than 40 of the 1500 known yeast species have been isolated from grape must. In this article, we review the specific flavour-active characteristics of those non-Saccharomyces species that might play a positive role in both spontaneous and inoculated wine ferments. We seek to present 'single-species' and 'multi-species' ferments in a new light and a new context, and we raise important questions about the direction of mixed-fermentation research to address market trends regarding so-called 'natural' wines. This review also highlights that, despite the fact that most frontier research and technological developments are often focussed primarily on S. cerevisiae, non-Saccharomyces research can benefit from the techniques and knowledge developed by research on the former. © 2013 Federation of European Microbiological Societies. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. All rights reserved.

          Related collections

          Most cited references129

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Sociomicrobiology: the connections between quorum sensing and biofilms.

          In the past decade, significant debate has surrounded the relative contributions of genetic determinants versus environmental conditions to certain types of human behavior. While this debate goes on, it is with a certain degree of irony that microbiologists studying aspects of bacterial community behavior face the same questions. Information regarding two social phenomena exhibited by bacteria, quorum sensing and biofilm development, is reviewed here. These two topics have been inextricably linked, possibly because biofilms and quorum sensing represent two areas in which microbiologists focus on social aspects of bacteria. We will examine what is known about this linkage and discuss areas that might be developed. In addition, we believe that these two aspects of bacterial behavior represent a small part of the social repertoire of bacteria. Bacteria exhibit many social activities and they represent a model for dissecting social behavior at the genetic level. Therefore, we introduce the term 'sociomicrobiology'.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Tailoring wine yeast for the new millennium: novel approaches to the ancient art of winemaking.

            Yeasts are predominant in the ancient and complex process of winemaking. In spontaneous fermentations, there is a progressive growth pattern of indigenous yeasts, with the final stages invariably being dominated by the alcohol-tolerant strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. This species is universally known as the 'wine yeast' and is widely preferred for initiating wine fermentations. The primary role of wine yeast is to catalyze the rapid, complete and efficient conversion of grape sugars to ethanol, carbon dioxide and other minor, but important, metabolites without the development of off-flavours. However, due to the demanding nature of modern winemaking practices and sophisticated wine markets, there is an ever-growing quest for specialized wine yeast strains possessing a wide range of optimized, improved or novel oenological properties. This review highlights the wealth of untapped indigenous yeasts with oenological potential, the complexity of wine yeasts' genetic features and the genetic techniques often used in strain development. The current status of genetically improved wine yeasts and potential targets for further strain development are outlined. In light of the limited knowledge of industrial wine yeasts' complex genomes and the daunting challenges to comply with strict statutory regulations and consumer demands regarding the future use of genetically modified strains, this review cautions against unrealistic expectations over the short term. However, the staggering potential advantages of improved wine yeasts to both the winemaker and consumer in the third millennium are pointed out. Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Yeast interactions and wine flavour.

              Wine is the product of complex interactions between fungi, yeasts and bacteria that commence in the vineyard and continue throughout the fermentation process until packaging. Although grape cultivar and cultivation provide the foundations of wine flavour, microorganisms, especially yeasts, impact on the subtlety and individuality of the flavour response. Consequently, it is important to identify and understand the ecological interactions that occur between the different microbial groups, species and strains. These interactions encompass yeast-yeast, yeast-filamentous fungi and yeast-bacteria responses. The surface of healthy grapes has a predominance of Aureobasidium pullulans, Metschnikowia, Hanseniaspora (Kloeckera), Cryptococcus and Rhodotorula species depending on stage of maturity. This microflora moderates the growth of spoilage and mycotoxigenic fungi on grapes, the species and strains of yeasts that contribute to alcoholic fermentation, and the bacteria that contribute to malolactic fermentation. Damaged grapes have increased populations of lactic and acetic acid bacteria that impact on yeasts during alcoholic fermentation. Alcoholic fermentation is characterised by the successional growth of various yeast species and strains, where yeast-yeast interactions determine the ecology. Through yeast-bacterial interactions, this ecology can determine progression of the malolactic fermentation, and potential growth of spoilage bacteria in the final product. The mechanisms by which one species/strain impacts on another in grape-wine ecosystems include: production of lytic enzymes, ethanol, sulphur dioxide and killer toxin/bacteriocin like peptides; nutrient depletion including removal of oxygen, and production of carbon dioxide; and release of cell autolytic components. Cell-cell communication through quorum sensing molecules needs investigation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                FEMS Yeast Research
                FEMS Yeast Res
                Wiley
                15671356
                March 2014
                March 2014
                November 11 2013
                : 14
                : 2
                : 215-237
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ARC Infruitec-Nietvoorbij; Stellenbosch South Africa
                [2 ]The Australian Wine Research Institute; Adelaide SA Australia
                [3 ]Macquarie University; Sydney NSW Australia
                Article
                10.1111/1567-1364.12111
                24164726
                4c63d8aa-2c8b-434d-915f-3e537afe96bc
                © 2013
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article