Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22729542›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2012

Evaluation of gene modification strategies for the development of low-alcohol-wine yeasts.

C Varela, D R Kutyna, M R Solomon, C A Black, A Borneman, P A Henschke, I S Pretorius, P J Chambers

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 116 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Ethanol Reduction in Montepulciano Wine:Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Possible Role for Allelic Variation in YeastFrontiers in microbiology · 2021
    Article
  11. Next Generation Winemakers: Genetic Engineering inBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. A Rapid Method for Selecting Non-Microorganisms · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C VarelaThe Australian Wine Research Institute, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. Cristian.Varela@awri.com.au
D R Kutyna
M R Solomon
C A Black
A Borneman
P A Henschke
I S Pretorius
P J Chambers
Australian Wine Research Institute · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Saccharomyces cerevisiae has evolved a highly efficient strategy for energy generation which maximizes ATP energy production from sugar. This adaptation enables efficient energy generation under anaerobic conditions and limits competition from other microorganisms by producing toxic metabolites, such as ethanol and CO(2). Yeast fermentative and flavor capacity forms the biotechnological basis of a wide range of alcohol-containing beverages. Largely as a result of consumer demand for improved flavor, the alcohol content of some beverages like wine has increased. However, a global trend has recently emerged toward lowering the ethanol content of alcoholic beverages. One option for decreasing ethanol concentration is to use yeast strains able to divert some carbon away from ethanol production. In the case of wine, we have generated and evaluated a large number of gene modifications that were predicted, or known, to impact ethanol formation. Using the same yeast genetic background, 41 modifications were assessed. Enhancing glycerol production by increasing expression of the glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase gene, GPD1, was the most efficient strategy to lower ethanol concentration. However, additional modifications were needed to avoid negatively affecting wine quality. Two strains carrying several stable, chromosomally integrated modifications showed significantly lower ethanol production in fermenting grape juice. Strain AWRI2531 was able to decrease ethanol concentrations from 15.6% (vol/vol) to 13.2% (vol/vol), whereas AWRI2532 lowered ethanol content from 15.6% (vol/vol) to 12% (vol/vol) in both Chardonnay and Cabernet Sauvignon juices. Both strains, however, produced high concentrations of acetaldehyde and acetoin, which negatively affect wine flavor. Further modifications of these strains allowed reduction of these metabolites.

Indexed as

AlcoholsAnaerobiosisCarbonCarbon DioxideEnergy MetabolismFermentationGlycerolMetabolic EngineeringSaccharomyces cerevisiaeWineAlcoholsCarbonCarbon DioxideGlycerol

Identifiers

PMID22729542
PMCPMC3416606
OpenAlexW2050633946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.