A multi-phase approach to select new wine yeast strains with enhanced fermentative fitness and glutathione production
The genetic improvement of winemaking yeasts is a virtually infinite process, as the design of new strains must always cope with varied and ever-evolving production contexts. Good wine yeasts must feature both good primary traits, which are related to the overall fermentative fitness of the strain, and secondary traits, which provide accessory features augmenting its technological value. In this context, the superiority of “blind,” genetic improvement techniques, as those based on the direct selection of the desired phenotype without prior knowledge of the genotype, was widely proven. Blind techniques such as adaptive evolution strategies were implemented for the enhancement of many traits of interest in the winemaking field. However, these strategies usually focus on single traits: this possibly leads to genetic tradeoff phenomena, where the selection of enhanced secondary traits might lead to sub-optimal primary fermentation traits. To circumvent this phenomenon, we applied a multi-step and strongly directed genetic improvement strategy aimed at combining a strong fermentative aptitude (primary trait) with an enhanced production of glutathione (secondary trait). We exploited the random genetic recombination associated to a library of 69 monosporic clones of strain UMCC 855 (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) to search for new candidates possessing both traits. This was achieved by consecutively applying three directional selective criteria: molybdate resistance (1), fermentative aptitude (2), and glutathione production (3). The strategy brought to the selection of strain 21T2-D58, which produces a high concentration of glutathione, comparable to that of other glutathione high-producers, still with a much greater fermentative aptitude.
KeywordsFermentation Saccharomyces cerevisiae Glutathione Performance Adaptive evolution
Compliance with ethical standards
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
- Ambroset C, Petit M, Brion C, Sanchez I, Delobel P, Guérin C, Chiapello H, Nicolas P, Bigey F, Dequin S, Blondin B (2011) Deciphering the molecular basis of wine yeast fermentation traits using a combined genetic and genomic approach. G3 Genes Genom Gene 1:263–281. https://doi.org/10.1534/g3.111.000422 Google Scholar
- Bisson LF (1999) Stuck and sluggish fermentations. Am J Enol Vitic 50:107–119Google Scholar
- Cacho J, Castells JE, Esteban A, Laguna B, Sagristá N (1995) Iron, copper, and manganese influence on wine oxidation. Am J Enol Vitic 46:380–384Google Scholar
- De Vero L, Bonciani T, Verspohl A, Mezzetti F, Giudici P (2017) High-glutathione producing yeasts obtained by genetic improvement strategies: a focus on adaptive evolution approaches for novel wine strains. AIMS Microbiol 3(2):155–170. https://doi.org/10.3934/microbiol.2017.2.155 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Dubourdieu D, Lavigne V (2004) The role of glutathione on the aromatic evolution of dry white wine. Vinidea Net - Wine Internet Tech J 2:1–9Google Scholar
- Giudici P, Kunkee RE (1994) The effect of nitrogen deficiency and sulfur-containing amino acids on the reduction of sulfate to hydrogen sulfide by wine yeasts. Am J Enol Vitic 45:107–112Google Scholar
- Giudici P, Zambonelli C (1992) Criteri di selezione dei lieviti per enologia. Vignevini 9:29–34Google Scholar
- Hara S, Iimura Y, Otsuka K (1980) Breeding of useful killer wine yeasts. Am J Enol Vitic 31:28–33Google Scholar
- Mezzetti F, Fay JC, Giudici P, De Vero L (2017) Genetic variation and expression changes associated with molybdate resistance from a glutathione producing wine strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. PLoS One 12(7):e0180814. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180814 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Pretorius IS (2000) Tailoring wine yeast for the new millennium: novel approaches to the ancient art of winemaking. Yeast 16(8):675–729. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0061(20000615)16:8<675::AID-YEA585>3.0.CO;2-B CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Quatrini P, Marineo S, Puglia AM, Restuccia C, Randazzo CL, Spagna G, Barbagallo RN, Palmeri R, Giudici P (2008) Partial sequencing of the β-glucosidase-encoding gene of yeast strains isolated from musts and wines. Ann Microbiol 58(3):503–508. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03175549 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Schütz M, Gafner J (1994) Dynamics of the yeast strain population during spontaneous alcoholic fermentation determined by CHEF gel electrophoresis. Lett Appl Microbiol 19(4):253–257. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-765X.1994.tb00957.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Simpson RF (1982) Factors affecting oxidative browning of white wine. Vitis 21:233–239Google Scholar
- Swiegers J, Bartowsky E, Henschke PA, Pretorius IS (2005) Yeast and bacterial modulation of wine aroma and flavour. Aust J Grape Wine Res 11(2):139–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0238.2005.tb00285.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Swinnen S, Schaerlaekens K, Pais T, Claesen J, Hubmann G, Yang Y, Demeke M, Foulquié-Moreno MR, Goovaerts A, Souvereyns K, Clement L, Dumortier F, Thevelein JM (2012) Identification of novel causative genes determining the complex trait of high ethanol tolerance in yeast using pooled-segregant whole-genome sequence analysis. Genome Res 22(5):975–984. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.131698.111 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar