terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 IMPACT OF ABIOTIC AND BIOTIC FACTORS ON BIOADHESION PROPERTIES OF BRETTANOMYCES BRUXELLENSIS

IMPACT OF ABIOTIC AND BIOTIC FACTORS ON BIOADHESION PROPERTIES OF BRETTANOMYCES BRUXELLENSIS

Abstract

Brettanomyces bruxellensis is an ubiquitous yeast associated with different fermentation media such as beer and kombucha, where its presence is beneficial to bring an aromatic typicity. However, it is a main spoilage yeast in wines, in which it produces volatile phenols responsible for organoleptic deviations causing significant economic losses (Chatonnet et al., 1992). Cellar and winery equipment’s are considered as the first source of contamination, during fermentation and wine ageing process (Connel et al., 2002). Indeed, it is possible to find B. bruxellensis in the air, on walls and floors of the cellars, on small materials, vats and barrels. Furthermore, specific strains are recurrently isolated in wines of certain wineries, thus showing the ability of the species to be resident in the cellar for long periods (Cibrario et al., 2019). Bioadhesion phenomena and biofilm formation are protective mechanisms that could explain the persistence of B. bruxellensis in the winery and recurrent wine contaminations. A subset of 17 B. bruxellensis strains, representative of the species genetic diversity and showing contrasting bioadhesion phenotypes, were selected to study the impact of pH and ethanol concentration on electronegativity (Zeta potential), hydrophobic character (MATS) and bioadhesion on stainless steel by confocal microscopy. The experimental design consisted in multi-strains and multi-species bioadhesions in order to observe potential interactions. Our results show that pH and ethanol concentrations do not impact the phenotypes but that the strains and genetic groups are the main factors explaining the variance suggesting the role of genetic mechanisms on bioadhesion properties. Regarding multispecies bioadhesion, a decrease in the bioadhesion of B. bruxellensis is observed in association with lactic acid and acetic acid bacteria. Multi-strains bioadhesion of B. bruxellensis show that the most bioadhesive strain is present in higher proportions during the first stages of the bioadhesive process comparing with other strains. This study provides new insights into the impact of environmental factors on B. bruxellensis lifestyles as bioadhesion in response to stressful environments, with major consequences on surface colonization in food industry and wine spoilage.

 

1. Chatonnet, P., Dubourdie, D., Boidron, J. -n., Pons, M., 1992. The origin of ethylphenols in wines. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 60, 165–178. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740600205
2. Cibrario, A., Avramova, M., Dimopoulou, M., Magani, M., Miot-Sertier, C., Mas, A., Portillo, M.C., Ballestra, P., Albertin, W., Masneuf-Pomarede, I., Dols-Lafargue, M., 2019. Brettanomyces bruxellensis wine isolates show high geographical dispersal and long persistence in cellars. PLOS ONE 14, e0222749. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222749
3. Connell, L., Stender, H., Edwards, C.G., 2002. Rapid Detection and Identification of Brettanomyces from Winery Air Samples Based on Peptide Nucleic Acid Analysis. Am J Enol Vitic. 53, 322–324.

DOI:

Publication date: February 9, 2024

Issue: OENO Macrowine 2023

Type: Poster

Authors

Paul Le Montagner1,2,3, Cécile Miot-Sertier¹, Marguerite Dols-Lafargue¹, Warren Albertin¹, Vincent Renouf³, Virginie Moine², Isabelle Masneuf Pomarède1,4

1. Univ. Bordeaux, INRAE, Bordeaux INP, Bordeaux Sciences Agro, OENO, UMR 1366, ISVV, 33140, Villenave d’Ornon, France 
2. Biolaffort, Floirac, France
3. Laboratoire Excell, Floirac, France
4. Bordeaux Sciences Agro, Gradignan, France

Contact the author*

Keywords

Brettanomyces bruxellensis, Wine, Spoilage, Bioadhesion

Tags

IVES Conference Series | oeno macrowine 2023 | oeno-macrowine

Citation

Related articles…

WINE SWIRLING: A FIRST STEP TOWARDS THE UNLOCKING OF THE WINE’STASTER GESTURE

Right after the pouring of wine in a glass, a myriad of volatile organic compounds, including ethanol, overwhelm the glass headspace, thus causing the so-called wine’s bouquet [1]. Otherwise, it is worth noting that during wine tasting, most people automatically swirl their glass to enhance the release of aromas in the glass headspace [1]. About a decade ago, Swiss researchers revealed the complex fluid mechanics underlying wine swirling [2]. However, despite mechanically repeated throughout wine tasting, the consequences of glass swirling on the chemical space found in the headspace of wine glasses are still barely known.

PROGRESS OF STUDIES OF LEES ORIGINATING FROM THE FIRST ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATION OF CHAMPAGNE WINES

Champagne wines are produced via a two-step process: the first is an initial alcoholic fermentation of grape must that produces a still base wine, followed by a second fermentation in bottle – the prise de mousse – that produces the effervescence. This appellation produces non-vintage sparkling wines composed of still base wines assembled from different vintages, varieties, and regions. These base wines, or “reserve wines,” are typically conserved on their fine lies and used to compensate for quality variance between vintages (1). Continuously blending small amounts of these reserve wines into newer ones also facilitates preserving the producer’s “house style.”

CONSENSUS AND SENSORY DOMINANCE ARE DEPENDENT ON QUALITY CONCEPT DEFINITIONS

The definition of the term “quality” in sensory evaluation of food products does not seem to be consensual. Descriptive or liking methods are generally used to differentiate between wines (Lawless et al., 1997). Nevertheless, quality evaluation of a product such as wine can also relate to emotional aspects. As exposed by Costell (2002), product quality is defined as an integrated impression, like acceptability, pleasure, or emotional experiences during tasting. According to the ‘modality appropriateness’ hypothesis which predicts that wine tasters weigh the most suitable sensory inputs for a specific assess- ment (Freides, 1974; Welch & Warren, 1980), the nature of the quality definitions may modulate sensory influences.

USE OF 13C CP/MAS NMR AND EPR SPECTROSCOPIC TECHNIQUES TO CHARACTERIZE MACROMOLECULAR CHANGES IN OAK WOOD(QUERCUS PETRAEA) DURING TOASTING

For coopers, toasting process is considered a crucial step in barrel production during which oak wood (Q. petraea) develops several aromatic nuances released to the wine during its maturation. Toasting consists of applying different degrees of heat to a barrel for a specific period. As the temperature increases, thermal degradation of oak wood structure produces a huge range of chemical compounds. Many studies have identified the main key aroma volatile compounds (whisky-lactone, furfural, eugenol, guaiacol, vanillin). However, detailed information on how the chemical structure of oak wood degrades with increasing toasting level is still lacking.

INVESTIGATION INTO MOUSY OFF-FLAVOR IN WINE USING GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY-MASS SPECTROMETRY WITH STIR BAR SORPTIVE EXTRACTION

Mousy off-flavor is one of the defects of microbial origin in wine. It is described as a particularly unpleasant defect reminiscent of rodent urine (a “dirty mouse cage”), and grilled foods such as popcorn, rice, crackers, and bread crust. Prior to the 2010s, mousiness was very uncommon but it has been becoming more frequent in recent years. It is often associated with an increase in pH as well as certain oenological practices, which tend to significantly decrease the use of sulfur dioxide.