| Literature DB >> 35744720 |
Pierre Ledormand1, Nathalie Desmasures1, Cédric Midoux2,3,4, Olivier Rué2,3, Marion Dalmasso1.
Abstract
Phageomes are known to play a key role in the functioning of their associated microbial communities. The phageomes of fermented foods have not been studied thoroughly in fermented foods yet, and even less in fermented beverages. Two approaches were employed to investigate the presence of phages in cider, a fermented beverage made from apple, during a fermentation process of two cider tanks, one from an industrial producer and one from a hand-crafted producer. The phageome (free lytic phages) was explored in cider samples with several methodological developments for total phage DNA extraction, along with single phage isolation. Concentration methods, such as tangential flow filtration, flocculation and classical phage concentration methods, were employed and tested to extract free phage particles from cider. This part of the work revealed a very low occurrence of free lytic phage particles in cider. In parallel, a prophage investigation during the fermentation process was also performed using a metagenomic approach on the total bacterial genomic DNA. Prophages in bacterial metagenomes in the two cider tanks seemed also to occur in low abundance, as a total of 1174 putative prophages were identified in the two tanks overtime, and only two complete prophages were revealed. Prophage occurrence was greater at the industrial producer than at the hand-crafted producer, and different dynamics of prophage trends were also observed during fermentation. This is the first report dealing with the investigation of the phageome and of prophages throughout a fermentation process of a fermented beverage.Entities:
Keywords: cider; fermented beverages; metagenomics; phageome; phages; prophage
Year: 2022 PMID: 35744720 PMCID: PMC9230842 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms10061203
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Cider samples collected for the study of the phageome and for the prophage investigation.
| Sample ID | Producer ID (French Department) | Fermentation Time (Days) | Tank ID—Tank Volume (hL) | Sugar Concentration kg/m3 | pH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1B1 | B (Calvados) | 0 | C1—120 | 1060 | 4.02 |
| C1B2 | B (Calvados) | 7 | C1—120 | 1056 | 4.05 |
| C1B3 | B (Calvados) | 14 | C1—120 | 1048 | 4.03 |
| C1B4 | B (Calvados) | 27 | C1—120 | 1036 | 4.01 |
| C2P1 | P (Manche) | 0 | C2—10 | 1056 | 3.32 |
| C2P2 | P (Manche) | 12 | C2—10 | 1049 | 3.35 |
| C2P3 | P (Manche) | 25 | C2—10 | 1040 | 3.52 |
| C2P4 | P (Manche) | 36 | C2—10 | 1036 | 3.58 |
Overview of the conditions tested for the collection of the phageome from cider. Roman numerals from I to IX indicate methodological steps referred to in the text.
| Tested Conditions to Collect Viral Particles from Cider | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | II | III | IV | V | VI | VII | VIII | IX | |
| Tested volumes of cider (mL) | 50 | 20, 50, 1000 | 400 | ||||||
| Sample spiked with phage UCMA 21115 (PFU/mL) | Yes (104–109) | Yes (105) | Yes (104–108) | ||||||
| pH adjusted to 5.5 | Yes | Yes | |||||||
| Precipitation with 10% PEG-8000 and 0.5 M NaCl | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||||
| Centrifugation step | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||
| DNA extraction from | Pellet | Supernatant | Pellet | Pellet | Supernatant | Pellet | Pellet | Retentate | Flocculate |
Efficiency of iron-based flocculation to recover phage UCMA 21115 from cider samples.
| Inoculated Quantity of Phage UCMA 21115 in 400 mL of Cider (i.e., Concentration) | Retrieved Quantity of Phage UCMA 21115 after Flocculation in Cider |
|---|---|
| 4 × 1010 | 8.5 × 108 |
| 4 × 109 | 9.9 × 107 |
| 4 × 108 | 6.6 × 106 |
| 4 × 107 | 7.6 × 105 |
| 4 × 106 | 5.0 × 103 |
Figure 1Heatmap showing the dynamics of the most abundant prophages retrieved during the first month of the fermentation process for producer B. C1 indicates the tank ID, and B1, B2, B3 and B4 are the sampling points during the fermentation process, in reference to Table 1. NODE referred to the identified prophage and the mentioned bacterial identifications represent the best host species of the prophage predicted after blast (E-value < 10−16; % of identity >85%). RPKM value above 5.0 was considered for the construction of the heatmap. Green to red: lowest to highest abundance.
Figure 2Virus taxonomic assignations at the family level during cider fermentation process for two producers (B: industrial and P: hand-crafted). C1 and C2 indicate the tank ID, and B1, B2, B3, B4, P1, P2, P3 and P4 are the sampling points during the fermentation process, in reference to Table 1.