| Literature DB >> 35736052 |
Flávia Silva-Sousa1,2, Ticiana Fernandes1,2, Fábio Pereira1,2, Diana Rodrigues1,2, Teresa Rito1,2, Carole Camarasa3, Ricardo Franco-Duarte1,2, Maria João Sousa1,2.
Abstract
Wine is a particularly complex beverage resulting from the combination of several factors, with yeasts being highlighted due to their fundamental role in its development. For many years, non-Saccharomyces yeasts were believed to be sources of spoilage and contamination, but this idea was challenged, and many of these yeasts are starting to be explored for their beneficial input to wine character. Among this group, Torulaspora delbrueckii is gaining relevance within the wine industry, owing to its low volatile acidity production, increased release of aromatic compounds and enhanced color intensity. In addition, this yeast was also attracting interest in other biotechnological areas, such as bread and beer fermentation. In this work, a set of 40 T. delbrueckii strains, of varied geographical and technological origins, was gathered in order to characterize the phenotypic behavior of this species, focusing on different parameters of biotechnological interest. The fermentative performance of the strains was also evaluated through individual fermentations in synthetic grape must with the isolates' metabolic profile being assessed by HPLC. Data analysis revealed that T. delbrueckii growth is significantly affected by high temperature (37 °C) and ethanol concentrations (up to 18%), alongside 1.5 mM SO2, showing variable fermentative power and yields. Our computation models suggest that the technological origin of the strains seems to prevail over the geographical origin as regards the influence on yeast properties. The inter-strain variability and profile of the products through the fermentative processes reinforce the potential of T. delbrueckii from a biotechnological point of view.Entities:
Keywords: biotechnology; bread; data mining; metabolic characterization; non-Saccharomyces; phenotypic characterization; wine
Year: 2022 PMID: 35736052 PMCID: PMC9225199 DOI: 10.3390/jof8060569
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Fungi (Basel) ISSN: 2309-608X
Number of strains belonging to different phenotypic classes, as result of the screening comprising 31 tests, regarding values of optical density (Class 0: DO640 = 0.1; Class 1: 0.2 < DO640 < 0.4; Class 2: 0.5 < DO640 < 1.0; Class 3: DO640 > 1.0), killer phenotype (Class 0: neutral; Class 1: killer or sensitive phenotype), change of medium color (arbutin and BiGGY media), halo size (esculin medium) and cell viability after freezing.
| Phenotypic Test | Type of Medium | Phenotypic Classes | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | ||
| 15 °C | Liquid (synthetic must) | 3 | 3 | 26 | 8 |
| 25 °C | Liquid (synthetic must) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40 |
| 30 °C | Liquid (synthetic must) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40 |
| 37 °C | Liquid (synthetic must) | 35 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| Ethanol 5% ( | Liquid (synthetic must) | 1 | 1 | 2 | 36 |
| Ethanol 10% ( | Liquid (synthetic must) | 21 | 11 | 5 | 3 |
| Ethanol 14% ( | Liquid (synthetic must) | 37 | 3 | 0 | 2 |
| Ethanol 18% ( | Liquid (synthetic must) | 38 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Glucose (200 g/L) | Liquid (synthetic must) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40 |
| Fructose (200 g/L) | Liquid (synthetic must) | 0 | 0 | 2 | 38 |
| Sucrose (200 g/L) | Liquid (synthetic must) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 39 |
| Maltose (200 g/L) | Liquid (synthetic must) | 0 | 8 | 25 | 7 |
| NaCl (1.5 M) | Liquid (synthetic must) | 2 | 8 | 26 | 4 |
| KCl (1 M) | Liquid (synthetic must) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 39 |
| H2O2 (2 mM) | Liquid (synthetic must) | 13 | 0 | 1 | 26 |
| CuSO4 (5 mM) | Liquid (synthetic must) | 19 | 11 | 8 | 2 |
| Fluconazole (0.5 mg/mL) | Liquid (synthetic must) | 0 | 0 | 9 | 31 |
| Myclobutanil (0.5 mg/mL) | Liquid (synthetic must) | 0 | 4 | 26 | 10 |
| Metalaxyl (0.5 mg/mL) | Liquid (synthetic must) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40 |
| Tebuconazole (0.5 mg/mL) | Liquid (synthetic must) | 0 | 2 | 19 | 19 |
| Solid (Arbutin Agar) | 0 | 19 | 18 | 3 | |
| Solid (Bile Esculin Agar) | 2 | 12 | 24 | 2 | |
| H2S production | Solid (BiGGY Agar) | 4 | 2 | 10 | 24 |
| Ethanol 12% ( | Solid (MEA) | 3 | 15 | 13 | 9 |
| Ethanol 12% ( | Solid (MEA) | 15 | 11 | 7 | 7 |
| Ethanol 12% ( | Solid (MEA) | 18 | 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Ethanol 12% ( | Solid (MEA) | 23 | 8 | 5 | 4 |
| Ethanol 12% ( | Solid (MEA) | 28 | 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Killer activity—killer phenotype | Solid (YPD-MB Agar) | 39 | 1 | - | - |
| Killer activity—sensitive phenotype | Solid (YPD-MB Agar) | 37 | 3 | - | - |
| Freeze resistance | Liquid (LF) | 7 | 6 | 10 | 17 |
Figure 1Principal component analysis of phenotypic data of 40 T. delbrueckii strains. (A) Scores—40 strains distribution. Colors represent the technological application or origin of the strains: ●—winemaking; ●—arboreal/soil; ●—food; ●—bread; ●—water; ●—clinical; ●—other beverages; ●—unknown origin; (B) Loadings—24 phenotypic tests.
Figure 2Principal component analysis of metabolic data of 40 T. delbrueckii strains. (A) Scores—40 strains distribution. Colors represent the technological application or origin of the strains: ●—winemaking; ●—arboreal/soil; ●—food; ●—bread; ●—water; ●—clinical; ●—other beverages; ●—unknown origin; (B) Loadings—concentration of seven metabolites obtained by HPLC analysis, after 192 h of fermentation.
Figure 3k-means cluster analysis of T. delbrueckii strains’ characterization. (A) Features (phenotypic tests and metabolites quantified by HPLC) mostly contributing for the division of strains into two clusters, in terms of information gain and information gain ration; (B) Number of strains categorized in the two clusters defined with k-means algorithm, colored according with their technological application or origin: ●—winemaking; ●—arboreal/soil; ●—food; ●—bread; ●—water; ●—clinical; ●—other beverages; ●—unknown origin.
Confusion matrix indicating the technological group of 40 T. delbrueckii strains versus the technological group predicted using neural networks (AUC = 0.718). Correct predictions are highlighted in red.
| Predicted Technological Group | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arboreal/Soil | Bread | Clinical | Food | Other | Unknown | Water | Wine | Total | ||
| Real technological group | Arboreal/Soil |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 11 |
| Bread | 0 |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | |
| Clinical | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | |
| Food | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 5 | |
| Other beverages | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | |
| Unknown | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | |
| Water | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | |
| Wine | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 11 | |
| Total | 11 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 15 | 40 | |