| Literature DB >> 35336215 |
Juan Li1, Xiaoyu Wang2, Wenyan Wu1, Jingzhu Jiang1, Dandan Feng1, Yuanyuan Shi1, Ping Hu1.
Abstract
In this study, the correlations between microbial communities with physicochemical properties and volatile flavor compounds (VFCs) during the fermentation of traditional tomato sour soup (CTN) are explored. The results of high-throughput sequencing (HTS) of CTN showed that Lacticaseibacillus (28.67%), Enterobacter (12.37%), and Providencia (12.19%) were the dominant bacteria in the first round of fermentation, while Lacticaseibacillus (50.11%), Enterobacter (13.86%), and Providencia (8.61%) were the dominant bacteria in the second round of fermentation. Additionally, the dominant fungi genera of the first fermentation were Pichia (65.89%) and Geotrichum (30.56%), and the dominant fungi genera of the second fermentation were Pichia (73.68%), Geotrichum (13.99%), and Brettanomyces (5.15%). These results indicate that Lacticaseibacillus is one of the main dominant bacteria in CTN. Then, the dominant strain Lacticaseibacillus casei H1 isolated from CTN was used as a culture to ferment tomato sour soup to monitor dynamic changes in the physicochemical properties and VFCs during enhanced fermentation of tomato sour soup (TN). The physicochemical analysis showed that, compared with CTN, the TN group not only produced acid faster but also had an earlier peak of nitrite and a lower height. The results of the GC-IMS analysis showed that the ester and alcohol contents in the TN group were 1.26 times and 1.8 times that of the CTN group, respectively. Using an O2PLS-DA analysis, 11 bacterial genera and 18 fungal genera were identified as the functional core flora of the CTN group flavor production, further verifying the importance of dominant bacteria for the production of VFCs. This study proved that enhanced fermentation not only shortens the fermentation cycle of tomato sour soup, but also significantly improves its flavor quality, which has great value in the industrial production of tomato sour soup and in the development of a vegetable fermentation starter.Entities:
Keywords: dominant bacteria; enhanced fermentation; natural fermentation; tomato sour soup
Year: 2022 PMID: 35336215 PMCID: PMC8954891 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms10030640
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Figure 1Production process of traditional fermented tomato sour soup.
Figure 2Rarefaction curve and Shannon curve of sequencing reads of (a,b) the bacterial 16S rDNA gene and (c,d) the fungal ITS rDNA gene from CTN samples.
Number of sequences analyzed, observed diversity richness (observed OTUs), community richness index (Chao 1 and ACE), community diversity index (Shannon and Simpson), and estimated sample coverage for 16S rDNA and ITS rDNA libraries of CTN samples.
| Sample | Richness Index | Diversity Index | Coverage | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACE | Chao 1 | Simpson | Shannon | Bacteria | Fungi | |||||
| Bacteria | Fungi | Bacteria | Fungi | Bacteria | Fungi | Bacteria | Fungi | |||
| A | 96.41 ± 3.93 b | 56.72 ± 9.07 a | 94.87 ± 3.45 b | 52.19 ± 6.54 a | 0.9 ± 0.003 a | 0.70 ± 0.02 d | 4.09 ± 0.05 ab | 2.45 ± 009 c | 0.999 | 0.9992 |
| B | 29.87 ± 1.97 c | 60.55 ± 14.77 a | 27.32 ± 1.36 c | 59.50 ± 13.45 a | 0.45 ± 0.01 b | 0.74 ± 0.01 c | 1.55 ± 0.03 c | 2.47 ± 0.03 c | 0.9997 | 0.9994 |
| C | 106.3 ± 4.7 ab | 71.69 ± 10.81 a | 105.51 ± 5.20 ab | 63.95 ± 6.65 a | 0.89 ± 0.01 a | 0.67 ± 0.03 e | 4.00 ± 0.08 b | 2.43 ± 0.15 c | 0.9987 | 0.999 |
| D | 121.17 ± 26.52 a | 64.22 ± 12.29 a | 122.89 ± 15.01 a | 66.86 ± 12.92 a | 0.91 ± 0.01 a | 0.77 ± 0.01 b | 4.19 ± 0.19 a | 2.89 ± 0.05 b | 0.9983 | 0.9991 |
| E | 103.8 ± 8.53 ab | 73.198 ± 15.50 a | 114.32 ± 19.22 ab | 72.53 ± 18.22 a | 0.90 ± 00.003 a | 0.79 ± 0.01 ab | 4.09 ± 0.05 ab | 3.13 ± 0.08 a | 0.9988 | 0.9991 |
| F | 100.64 ± 4.47 ab | 66.52 ± 6.88 a | 100.56 ± 5.39 b | 64.86 ± 7.67 a | 0.90 ± 0.002 a | 0.82 ± 0.01 a | 4.11 ± 0.02 ab | 3.17 ± 0.06 a | 0.999 | 0.9992 |
Values are expressed as the mean ± standard error (n = 3), a–e different letters in the same column indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). (A–F) represent samples during traditional tomato sour soup (CTN) fermentation.
Figure 3The relative abundance of bacteria and fungi in CTN at the phylum level (a,c) and genus level (b,d). Each phylum or genus is represented by a unique color. Each column represents a different studied sample of CTN (A–F). CTN refers to the traditional tomato sour soup sample.
Figure 4Changes in physicochemical indexes during TN and CTN fermentation: (a) pH, (b) total acid, (c) nitrite content. TN refers to the enhanced fermentation tomato sour soup sample; CTN refers to the traditional tomato sour soup sample.
Content of organic acids (mg·mL−1) during the fermentation of CTN and TN.
| Category | Oxalic | Tartaric Acid | Malic | Lactic | Acetic | Citric | Succinic Acid | Propionic Acid | Fumaric Acid |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A (mg·mL−1) | 0.37 ± 0.05 d | 0.84 ± 0.01 cd | 1.22 ± 0.05 f | 27.09 ± 0.06 ef | 5.93 ± 0.06 d | 4.33 ± 0.11 f | 9.03 ± 0.05 g | 0.2 ± 0.12 f | 0 |
| B (mg·mL−1) | 0.15 ± 0.06 f | 1.02 ± 0.03 bc | 2.49 ± 0.01 d | 17.22 ± 0.04 h | 6.71 ± 0.05 cd | 3.45 ± 0.06 h | 16.23 ± 0.17 b | 1.3 ± 0.05 b | 0 |
| C (mg·mL−1) | 0.18 ± 0.05 ef | 0.63 ± 0.04 de | 0.53 ± 0.05 h | 44.28 ± 0.51 a | 6.09 ± 0.05 d | 1.88 ± 0.05 j | 12.93 ± 0.05 f | 0.67 ± 0.12 e | 0 |
| D (mg·mL−1) | 0.22 ± 0.05 e | 1.04 ± 0.02 bc | 0.36 ± 0.02 i | 25.08 ± 0.12 g | 7.37 ± 0.02 c | 2.74 ± 0.05 i | 14.29 ± 0.11 e | 0.93 ± 0.06 d | 0 |
| E (mg·mL−1) | 0.23 ± 0.04 e | 1.33 ± 0.03 a | 3.66 ± 0.02 c | 27.18 ± 0.12 ef | 8.31 ± 0.57 b | 3.82 ± 0.12 g | 14.52 ± 0.17 d | 1.06 ± 0.06 c | 0 |
| F (mg·mL−1) | 0.24 ± 0.01 e | 1.21 ± 0.05 ab | 4.1 ± 0.06 b | 28.72 ± 0.12 d | 9.18 ± 0.58 a | 3.92 ± 0.05 g | 15.26 ± 0.12 c | 1.14 ± 0.017 c | - |
| A1 (mg·mL−1) | 0.37 ± 0.01 d | 0.71 ± 0.52 de | 4.85 ± 0.10 a | 3.12 ± 0.06 j | 3.62 ± 0.05 e | 7.5 ± 0.02 e | 0.85 ± 0.01 l | 0 | 0.71 ± 0.01 b |
| B1 (mg·mL−1) | 1.22 ± 0.01 b | 0.47 ± 0.01 e | 1.56 ± 0.03 e | 5.5 ± 0.05 i | 1.3 ± 0.58 f | 10.38 ± 0.23 d | 2.25 ± 0.02 k | 0 | 0.33 ± 0.03 c |
| C1 (mg·mL−1) | 1.4 ± 0.01 a | 0.41 ± 0.01 e | 1.57 ± 0.09 e | 26.57 ± 0.58 f | 3.88 ± 0.01 e | 11.98 ± 0.58 c | 3.54 ± 0.14 j | 0 | 0.02 ± 0.01 d |
| D1 (mg·mL−1) | 0.38 ± 0.06 d | 0.49 ± 0.03 e | 0.95 ± 0.03 g | 30.09 ± 0.57 c | 6.66 ± 0.58 cd | 12.51 ± 0.05 b | 6.68 ± 0.05 i | 0 | 0.03 ± 0.01 d |
| E1 (mg·mL−1) | 0.78 ± 0.01 c | 0.49 ± 0.02 e | 0.45 ± 0.06 hi | 31.26 ± 0.58 b | 6.2 ± 0.57 d | 12.85 ± 0.05 a | 7.42 ± 0.05 h | 0 | 0.02 ± 0.01 d |
| F1 (mg·mL−1) | 0.23 ± 0.01 e | 0.62 ± 0.06 de | 1.2 ± 0.08 f | 30.75 ± 0.57 e | 6.52 ± 0.57 d | 7.28 ± 0.17 e | 18.54 ± 0.12 a | 1.44 ± 0.05 a | 1.95 ± 0.01 a |
Values are expressed as the mean ± standard error (n = 3); different letters (a–l) in the same column indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). (A–F) represent samples during traditional tomato sour soup (CTN) fermentation. (A1–F1) represent the samples during the fermentation process of the enhanced fermentation tomato sour soup (TN).
Comparison of volatile compounds.
| Compound | Retention Index | Retention Time/s | Migration Time/ms | F | D1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Esters | |||||
| Methyl Salicylate | 1235.7 | 688.365 | 1.20588 | 424.79 | – |
| Butyl butanoate | 1004.3 | 356.079 | 1.81327 | 280.95 | – |
| Pentyl acetate | 912.8 | 274.089 | 1.76114 | 239.64 | 154.88 |
| Isoamyl acetate | 875 | 247.755 | 1.75345 | 224.98 | 6023.73 |
| Ethyl 2-methylbutanoate | 848.8 | 234.134 | 1.66369 | 216.25 | – |
| Ethyl 2-hydroxypropanoate | 818.5 | 218.374 | 1.54705 | 206.15 | – |
| Ethyl butanoate | 792.4 | 204.821 | 1.56923 | 197.52 | 105.65 |
| Butyl acetate | 806.1 | 211.905 | 1.63724 | 202.08 | – |
| Methyl 2-methylbutanoate | 769.8 | 194.685 | 1.54033 | 190.52 | – |
| 2-Methylpropyl acetate | 764 | 192.337 | 1.62702 | 188.86 | – |
| Ethyl 2-methylpropanoate | 748.9 | 186.175 | 1.58294 | 184.37 | 268.66 |
| Ethyl propanoate | 705.9 | 168.646 | 1.46174 | 171.59 | – |
| Ethyl Acetate | 596.7 | 137.37 | 1.34657 | 143.45 | 13898.89 |
| Isopropyl acetate | 654.9 | 152.715 | 1.48967 | 158.07 | – |
| Propyl butanoate | 898.9 | 262.349 | 1.69733 | 233.57 | – |
| Methyl hexanoate | 923.8 | 283.382 | 1.6923 | 244.39 | – |
| Ethyl heptanoate | 1100.3 | 493.969 | 1.92705 | 340.83 | – |
| Ethyl hexanoate-M | 1005.5 | 357.86 | 1.33 | – | 334.68 |
| Ethyl hexanoate-D | 1006.3 | 359.03 | 1.81 | – | 1157.28 |
| Methyl hexanoate | 923.9 | 283.5 | 1.69 | – | 265.26 |
| Ethyl butanoate | 793.3 | 205.29 | 1.57 | – | 5383.76 |
| 2-Methylpropyl acetate | 768 | 193.94 | 1.63 | – | 1753.84 |
| Propyl acetate | 706.3 | 168.82 | 1.47 | – | 1665.82 |
| Methyl acetate | 552.8 | 125.76 | 1.19 | – | 1256.93 |
| Hexyl acetate | 1016.4 | 373.57 | 1.91 | – | 591.28 |
| Olefins | |||||
| Limonene | 1031.8 | 395.617 | 1.21701 | 297.79 | 307.08 |
| alpha-Terpinene | 1025.4 | 386.493 | 1.22695 | 293.83 | – |
| alpha-Pinene | 946.6 | 302.684 | 1.22113 | 254.07 | – |
| Aldehydes | |||||
| 2-Decenal | 1267 | 733.342 | 1.47569 | 444.44 | – |
| (E)-2-Heptenal | 959.3 | 313.499 | 1.27664 | 259.65 | – |
| Benzaldehyde | 961.5 | 315.324 | 1.47823 | 260.7 | – |
| 3-Methylbutanal | 653.1 | 152.236 | 1.41542 | 157.58 | 308.79 |
| 2-Methylbutanal | 679.4 | 159.186 | 1.39664 | 164.15 | – |
| Butanal | 579.2 | 132.737 | 1.304 | 139.05 | – |
| (E)-2-Hexenal | 864.7 | 242.411 | 1.52651 | 221.46 | 2919.78 |
| Vanillin | 1398.9 | 922.715 | 1.26926 | 526.49 | – |
| Nonanal | 1110.2 | 508.25 | 1.48 | – | 115.96 |
| (E)-2-Octenal-M | 1058.6 | 434.04 | 1.34 | – | 488.64 |
| (E)-2-Octenal-D | 1058.6 | 434.04 | 1.83 | – | 117.27 |
| (E)-2-Heptenal-D | 955 | 309.85 | 1.68 | – | 58.54 |
| (Z)-2-Hexenal | 844.9 | 232.09 | 1.53 | – | 887.34 |
| Furfural | 828.5 | 223.58 | 1.34 | – | 399.64 |
| (E)-2-Pentenal | 749.4 | 186.37 | 1.37 | – | 244.06 |
| Propanal | 523.5 | 118.04 | 1.15 | – | 1403.93 |
| Pentanal | 702.3 | 167.22 | 1.41 | – | 895.79 |
| Ketones | |||||
| 6-Methyl-5-hepten-2-one | 993.1 | 342.088 | 1.18294 | 274.31 | 4247.15 |
| 3-Pentanone | 691.6 | 162.854 | 1.34156 | 167.31 | 438.19 |
| 2-Pentanone | 695.4 | 164.38 | 1.37 | – | 2387.85 |
| 2-Butanone | 572.5 | 130.984 | 1.25643 | 137.36 | |
| Alcohols | |||||
| 2-Octanol | 1004.7 | 356.687 | 1.45694 | 281.03 | – |
| (E)-3-hexen-1-ol | 835.7 | 227.325 | 1.54284 | 211.85 | – |
| 3-Methylpentanol | 840.2 | 229.658 | 1.60397 | 213.37 | – |
| 2-Hexanol | 803.7 | 210.673 | 1.58697 | 201.26 | 1985.79 |
| 3-Methyl-1-butanol | 727.7 | 177.527 | 1.47801 | 178.04 | – |
| Propanol | 543 | 123.195 | 1.27084 | 129.99 | 487.59 |
| 2-Propanol | 510.4 | 114.57 | 1.20354 | 121.8 | 4498.07 |
| Linalool | 1104.7 | 500.263 | 1.2256 | 343.2 | |
| Ethanol | 466.1 | 102.865 | 1.14036 | 110.69 | 8048.69 |
| 1-Hexanol | 875.8 | 248.17 | 1.64 | – | 1985.79 |
| 2-Methyl-1-butanol | 751.7 | 187.32 | 1.49 | – | 113.88 |
| 2-Pentenal | 738.2 | 181.83 | 1.36 | – | 381.44 |
| Isopentanol | 728.6 | 177.9 | 1.5 | – | 1914.83 |
| Isohexanol | 845.2 | 232.27 | 1.62 | – | 316.96 |
| 1-Pentanol | 761 | 191.09 | 1.51 | – | 71.46 |
| Acids | |||||
| Hexanoic acid | 938.5 | 295.882 | 1.66882 | 250.8 | |
| Propanoic acid | 714.4 | 172.15 | 1.26 | – | 92.86 |
| Phenols | |||||
| Methional | 986 | 336.005 | 1.48249 | 271.35 | – |
| Furans | |||||
| 2-Ethylfuran | 682.9 | 160.13 | 1.32 | – | 356.27 |
| 2-Pentylfuran | 997.1 | 345.738 | 1.2596 | 276.18 | 90.3 |
| others | |||||
| 2-Ethyl pyrazine | 924.6 | 284.1 | 1.52 | – | 317.48 |
| 2-Acetylthiazole | 1015.3 | 371.894 | 1.49811 | 287.65 | 821.19 |
Note: From left to right in the table, F and D1 are the peak volumes of flavor component ions detected by the two samples: F:CTN group fermented for 19 days; D1:TN fermentation for 7 days.
Figure 5The relative content of VFC during the fermentation of TN (a) and CTN (b). Notes: TN refers to the enhanced fermentation tomato sour soup sample (A1–E1); CTN refers to the traditional tomato sour soup sample (A–F). Each type of flavor is represented by a unique color. Each column represents a different studied sample.
Figure 6Correlation between RDA (OTU > 0.1%) and physicochemical index for bacterial genera. (A–F) represent samples during traditional tomato sour soup (CTN) fermentation. PH, TA—total acid content; NY—nitrite content; JSS—tartaric acid content; MA—malic acid content; LA—lactic acid content; AA—acetic acid content; CA—citric acid content; SA—succinic acid content; OA—oxalic acid.
Figure 7Correlations between RDA (OTU > 0.1%) and physicochemical indices for fungi. (A–F) represent samples during traditional tomato sour soup (CTN) fermentation. PH, TA—total acid content; NY—nitrite content; JSS—tartaric acid content; MA—malic acid content; LA—lactic acid content; AA—acetic acid content; CA—citric acid content; SA—succinic acid content; OA—oxalic acid.
Figure 8The CTN fermentation process based on the two-way orthogonal partial least squares (O2PLS) method, with diagrams (a): the bacterial genus level (VIP > 1, diagram c) in relation to VFCs (VIP > 1, diagram c); diagram (b): the fungal genus level (VIP > 1, diagram c) in relation to VFCs (VIP > 1, diagram c); diagram (c); the bacterialgenus level (VIP > 1), the fungal genus level (VIP > 1) and VFCs (VIP > 1).CTN refers to the traditional tomato sour soup sample; 1—2-pentylfuran, 2—alpha-Terpinene, 3—methional, 4—2-butanone, 5—2-octanol, 6—3-pentanone, 7—pentyl acetate, 8—Ethyl Acetate, 9—limonene, 10—ethyl 2-hydroxypropanoate, 11—2-methylpropyl acetate, 12—benzaldehyde, 13—linalool, 14—butanal, 15—6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one, 16—ethyl 2-methylpropanoate, 17—alpha-Pinene; a—Psychrobacter, b—Pseudomonas, c—Dysgonomonas, d—uncultured_bacterium_o_chloroplast, e—Anaerotignum, f—Lactococcus, g—Chishuiella, h—Morganella, i—Clostridium, J—Paenirhodobacter, k—Lacticaseibacillus; Z—Pichia, L—Kazachstania, M—Wickerhamiella, N—Trichosporon, O—Yamadazyma, P—Eremothecium, Q—Geotrichum, R—Kodamaea, S—Malassezia, T—Debaryomyces, U—Hanseniaspora, V—Penicillium, W—Kurtzmaniella, X—Meyerozyma, Y—Brettanomyces, S1—Candida, S2—Ceratobasidium, S3—Clavispora.