ArticlePloS one2015
Comparative transcriptomic analysis reveals similarities and dissimilarities in Saccharomyces cerevisiae wine strains response to nitrogen availability.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multi-omics framework to reveal the molecular determinants of fermentation performance in wine yeast populations.Microbiome · 2024Article
- Article
- Machine Learning Techniques Disclose the Combined Effect of Fermentation Conditions on Yeast Mixed-Culture Dynamics and Wine Quality.Microorganisms · 2022Article
- The Timing of Nitrogen Addition Impacts Yeast Genes Expression and the Production of Aroma Compounds During Wine Fermentation.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Pesticides, cosmetics, drugs: identical and opposite influences of various molecular features as measures of endpoints similarity and dissimilarity.Molecular diversity · 2021Article
- Secondary Aroma: Influence of Wine Microorganisms in Their Aroma Profile.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Transcriptomic analysis of a Clostridium thermocellum strain engineered to utilize xylose: responses to xylose versus cellobiose feeding.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Disentangling the genetic bases of Saccharomyces cerevisiae nitrogen consumption and adaptation to low nitrogen environments in wine fermentation.Biological research · 2020Review
- Differential Gene Expression and Allele Frequency Changes Favour Adaptation of a Heterogeneous Yeast Population to Nitrogen-Limited Fermentations.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
- Transcriptome Profile of Yeast Strain Used for Biological Wine Aging Revealed Dynamic Changes of Gene Expression in Course of Flor Development.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
- Genetic variants of TORC1 signaling pathway affect nitrogen consumption in Saccharomyces cerevisiae during alcoholic fermentation.PloS one · 2019Article
- Article
- Aroma Profile of Montepulciano d'Abruzzo Wine Fermented by Single and Co-culture Starters of Autochthonous Saccharomyces and Non-saccharomyces Yeasts.Frontiers in microbiology · 2016Article
- Exploring the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Volatile Metabolome: Indigenous versus Commercial Strains.PloS one · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nitrogen levels in grape-juices are of major importance in winemaking ensuring adequate yeast growth and fermentation performance. Here we used a comparative transcriptome analysis to uncover wine yeasts responses to nitrogen availability during fermentation. Gene expression was assessed in three genetically and phenotypically divergent commercial wine strains (CEG, VL1 and QA23), under low (67 mg/L) and high nitrogen (670 mg/L) regimes, at three time points during fermentation (12 h, 24 h and 96 h). Two-way ANOVA analysis of each fermentation condition led to the identification of genes whose expression was dependent on strain, fermentation stage and on the interaction of both factors. The high fermenter yeast strain QA23 was more clearly distinct from the other two strains, by differential expression of genes involved in flocculation, mitochondrial functions, energy generation and protein folding and stabilization. For all strains, higher transcriptional variability due to fermentation stage was seen in the high nitrogen fermentations. A positive correlation between maximum fermentation rate and the expression of genes involved in stress response was observed. The finding of common genes correlated with both fermentation activity and nitrogen up-take underlies the role of nitrogen on yeast fermentative fitness. The comparative analysis of genes differentially expressed between both fermentation conditions at 12 h, where the main difference was the level of nitrogen available, showed the highest variability amongst strains revealing strain-specific responses. Nevertheless, we were able to identify a small set of genes whose expression profiles can quantitatively assess the common response of the yeast strains to varying nitrogen conditions. The use of three contrasting yeast strains in gene expression analysis prompts the identification of more reliable, accurate and reproducible biomarkers that will facilitate the diagnosis of deficiency of this nutrient in the grape-musts and the development of strategies to optimize yeast performance in industrial fermentations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.