Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 New molecular evidence of wine yeast-bacteria interaction unraveled by untargeted metabolomic profiling

New molecular evidence of wine yeast-bacteria interaction unraveled by untargeted metabolomic profiling

Abstract

Bacterial malolactic fermentation (MLF) has a considerable impact on wine quality. The yeast strain used for primary fermentation can consistently stimulate (MLF+ phenotype) or inhibit (MLF- phenotype) malolactic bacteria and the MLF process as a function of numerous winemaking practices, but the molecular evidence behind still remains a mystery. In this study, such evidence was elucidated by the direct comparison of extracellular metabolic profiles of MLF+ and MLF- yeast phenotypes. Untargeted metabolomics combining ultrahigh-resolution FT-ICR-MS analysis, powerful machine learning methods and a comprehensive wine metabolite database, discovered around 800 putative biomarkers and 2500 unknown masses involved in phenotypic distinction. For the putative biomarkers, we also developed a biomarker identification workflow and elucidated the exact structure (by UPLC-Q-ToF-MS2) and/or exact physiological impact (by in vivo tests) of several novel biomarkers, such as gluconic acid, citric acid, caffeic acid-sulfate, palmitic acid and tripeptide Pro-Phe-Val. In addition to new biomarkers, molecular evidence was reflected by unprecedented chemical diversity (more than 3000 discriminant masses) that characterized MLF+ and MLF- phenotypes. Distinct chemical families such as phenolic compounds, carbohydrates, amino acids and peptides characterize the extracellular metabolic profiles of the MLF+ phenotype, whereas the MLF- phenotype is associated with sulphur-containing peptides. Moreover, the location of MLF+ biomarkers in the yeast metabolic network indicated the potential involvement of specific pathways in MLF stimulation. The untargeted approach used in this study played a significant role in discovering new and unexpected molecular evidence of wine yeast-bacteria interaction.

This work will appear in the accepted article in Metabolomics (Volume 12 issue 5). (http://link.springer.com/journal/11306).

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Article

Authors

Youzhong Liu*, Cedric Longin, Claudine Degueurce, Hervé Alexandre, Magali Deleris-Bou, Marianna Lucio, Mourad Harir, Philippe Schmitt-Kopplin, Régis Gougeon, Sara Forcisi, Sibylle Dr. Krieger-Weber

*Université de Bourgogne

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Glutathione content evolution during spontaneous alcoholic fermentations of Sangiovese grapes

Glutathione is a tripeptide (γ-Glu-Cys-Gly), which can occur in grapes, in must and in wine prevalently in the reduced form as well as in the oxidized form as glutathione disulfide. The importance of the reduced form of glutathione lies in its antioxidant activity. In must, it limits browning by reducing o-quinones produced by polyphenol oxidase activity on hydroxycinnamic acids; in wine, it exerts a protective effect on various aromatic compounds. Glutathione concentration in wine is lower than in grape juice and variable as it depends on several factors, ranging from the native content of grapes to winemaking technique.

Ethyl esters interact with the major wine Thaumatin Like Protein VVTL1

The interactions among aromatic compounds and proteins is an important issue for the quality of foods and beverages. In wine, the loss of flavor after vinification is associated to bentonite treatment and this effect can be the result of the removal of aroma compounds which are bound wine proteins. This phenomenon was recently demonstrated for long chain fatty acids and their ethyl esters (1). Since these latter compounds are spectroscopically silent, their association with proteins is not easy to measure.

A combination of biotechnology tools and coopers elements for an alternative the addition of SO2 at the end of the malolactic fermentation in red wines or at the “mutage” for the “liquoreux” wines

In red wines the post-MLF SO2 addition is an essential event. It is also the case for the “mutage” during the elaboration of the “liquoreux”. At these moments SO2 plays an antimicrobial action and an antioxidant effect. But at current pH of wines, ensuring a powerful molecular SO2 has become very difficult. Recent work on Brettanomyces strains have also shown that some strains are resistant up to 1.2 mg / L of molecular SO2. It’s also the case of the some Saccharomuces or Zygosaccharomyces strains suitable to re-ferment “liquoreux” wines after the “mutage”.

Testing the effectiveness of Cell-Wall material from grape pomace as fining agent for red wines

Lately several works highlighted the capacity of grape cell-wall material (CWM) to interact with proanthocyanidins (PA), indicating its potential use as fining agent for red wines.1–4 However, those studies were performed by using purified PAs and very high doses of CWM (almost ten-fold higher than those used in wine industry for other commercial fining agents). The present study focuses on the applicability of CWM from Cabernet sauvignon pomace as fining agent for red wines under real winery conditions. Grapes of cultivar Cabernet sauvignon were harvested at three different maturity levels
(unripe, mature, and overripe) and used for red winemaking. The pomace of such vinifications were used as source of CWM, and applied into red wines at two different concentrations: 0.2 g/L and 2.5 g/L.

Improving the phenolic composition of cv tempranillo wines by blending grapes of different ripening state

The aim of this work was to reduce the alcohol content of Tempranillo wine. Tempranillo wines were produced by grapes harvested at different ripening dates (August 11 which was 21 oBrix and September 28 with 25 oBrix). At the second date, the Tempranillo wines were elaborated as follows: grapes were destemmed, crushed and collected into 50 L stainless-steel vats. Before preferementative maceration in cold, 50 % (M1) and 70 % (M2) of the must have been replaced by the same percentage of must from the first harvest. In addition, a control wine (C) was performed with only grapes from the second harvest.