Literature DB >> 26385547

Metabolic responses to Lactobacillus plantarum contamination or bacteriophage treatment in Saccharomyces cerevisiae using a GC-MS-based metabolomics approach.

Feng-Xia Cui1,2, Rui-Min Zhang1, Hua-Qing Liu1, Yan-Feng Wang1, Hao Li3.   

Abstract

Bacteriophage can be used as a potential alternative agent for controlling Lactobacillus plantarum contamination during bioethanol production. However, how Saccharomyces cerevisiae respond against contaminative L. plantarum or added bacteriophage remains to be fully understood. In this study, gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and a multivariate analysis were employed to investigate the intracellular biochemical changes in S. cerevisiae cells that were elicited by L. plantarum contamination or bacteriophage treatment. The intracellular metabolite profiles originating from different groups were unique and could be distinguished with the aid of principal component analysis. Moreover, partial least-squares-discriminant analysis revealed a group classification and pairwise discrimination, and 13 differential metabolites with variable importance in the projection value greater than 1 were identified. The metabolic relevance of these compounds in the response of S. cerevisiae to L. plantarum contamination or bacteriophage treatment was discussed. Besides generating lactic acid and competing for nutrients or living space, L. plantarum contamination might also inhibit the growth of S. cerevisiae through regulating the glycolysis in S. cerevisiae. Moreover, increased concentrations of monounsaturated fatty acids secondary to bacteriophage treatment might lead to more membrane fluidity and promote the cell viability of S. cerevisiae.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bacteriophage; Bioethanol; Lactobacillus plantarum contamination; Metabolomics; Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26385547     DOI: 10.1007/s11274-015-1949-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Microbiol Biotechnol        ISSN: 0959-3993            Impact factor:   3.312


  39 in total

1.  In vivo efficiency evaluation of a phage cocktail in controlling severe colibacillosis in confined conditions and experimental poultry houses.

Authors:  Ana Oliveira; Rui Sereno; Joana Azeredo
Journal:  Vet Microbiol       Date:  2010-05-13       Impact factor: 3.293

2.  Regulation of Lactobacillus plantarum contamination on the carbohydrate and energy related metabolisms of Saccharomyces cerevisiae during bioethanol fermentation.

Authors:  Shi-Jun Dong; Xiang-Hua Lin; Hao Li
Journal:  Int J Biochem Cell Biol       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 5.085

Review 3.  Global strategies to integrate the proteome and metabolome.

Authors:  Alan Saghatelian; Benjamin F Cravatt
Journal:  Curr Opin Chem Biol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 8.822

4.  The use of metabolomics for the discovery of new biomarkers of effect.

Authors:  B van Ravenzwaay; G Coelho-Palermo Cunha; E Leibold; R Looser; W Mellert; A Prokoudine; T Walk; J Wiemer
Journal:  Toxicol Lett       Date:  2007-05-25       Impact factor: 4.372

5.  Relationship between ethanol tolerance, H+ -ATPase activity and the lipid composition of the plasma membrane in different wine yeast strains.

Authors:  F Aguilera; R A Peinado; C Millán; J M Ortega; J C Mauricio
Journal:  Int J Food Microbiol       Date:  2006-05-11       Impact factor: 5.277

6.  Use of sulfite and hydrogen peroxide to control bacterial contamination in ethanol fermentation.

Authors:  I S Chang; B H Kim; P K Shin
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 4.792

7.  Continuous ethanol fermentation from non-sulfuric acid-washed molasses using traditional stirred tank reactors and the flocculating yeast strain KF-7.

Authors:  Yue-Qin Tang; Ming-Zhe An; Ya-Ling Zhong; Morimura Shigeru; Xiao-Lei Wu; Kenji Kida
Journal:  J Biosci Bioeng       Date:  2009-07-28       Impact factor: 2.894

8.  Bacterial contaminants of fuel ethanol production.

Authors:  Kelly A Skinner; Timothy D Leathers
Journal:  J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2004-08-28       Impact factor: 3.346

Review 9.  Tolerance and stress response to ethanol in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  Junmei Ding; Xiaowei Huang; Lemin Zhang; Na Zhao; Dongmei Yang; Keqin Zhang
Journal:  Appl Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2009-09-16       Impact factor: 4.813

10.  Quantitative analysis of glycerol accumulation, glycolysis and growth under hyper osmotic stress.

Authors:  Elzbieta Petelenz-Kurdziel; Clemens Kuehn; Bodil Nordlander; Dagmara Klein; Kuk-Ki Hong; Therese Jacobson; Peter Dahl; Jörg Schaber; Jens Nielsen; Stefan Hohmann; Edda Klipp
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 4.475

View more
  1 in total

1.  The Toxic Effects of Tetrachlorobisphenol A in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Cells via Metabolic Interference.

Authors:  Juan Tian; Zhihua Ji; Fengbang Wang; Maoyong Song; Hao Li
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 4.379

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.