Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26712628›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of microbiology & biotechnology2016

Impact of different spray-drying conditions on the viability of wine Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains.

Maria Aponte, Gabriele Danilo Troianiello, Marika Di Capua, Raffaele Romano, Giuseppe Blaiotta

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of microbiology & biotechnology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Spray Drying Encapsulation ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  2. Microencapsulation by spray drying of coffee epiphytic yeasts Saccharomyces cerevisiae CCMA 0543 and Torulaspora delbrueckii CCMA 0684.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2022
    Article
  3. Totipotency ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  4. Survival of Spray-DriedFood technology and biotechnology · 2019
    Article
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

5 authors.

Maria AponteDipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Università 100, 80055, Portici, NA, Italy.
Gabriele Danilo TroianielloDipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Università 100, 80055, Portici, NA, Italy.
Marika Di CapuaDipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Università 100, 80055, Portici, NA, Italy.
Raffaele RomanoDipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Università 100, 80055, Portici, NA, Italy.
Giuseppe BlaiottaDipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Università 100, 80055, Portici, NA, Italy. blaiotta@unina.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spray-drying (SD) is widely considered a suitable method to preserve microorganisms, but data regarding yeasts are still scanty. In this study, the effect of growing media, process variables and carriers over viability of a wild wine Saccharomyces (S.) cerevisiae LM52 was evaluated. For biomass production, the strain was grown (batch and fed-batch fermentation) in a synthetic, as well as in a beet sugar molasses based-medium. Drying of cells resuspended in several combinations of soluble starch and maltose was performed at different inlet and outlet temperatures. Under the best conditions-suspension in soluble starch plus maltose couplet to inlet and outlet temperatures of 110 and 55 °C, respectively-the loss of viability of S. cerevisiae LM52 was 0.8 ± 0.1 and 0.5 ± 0.2 Log c.f.u. g(-1) for synthetic and molasses-based medium, respectively. Similar results were obtained when S. cerevisiae strains Zymoflore F15 and EC1118, isolated from commercial active dry yeast (ADY), were tested. Moreover, powders retained a high vitality and showed good fermentation performances up to 6 month of storage, at both 4 and -20 °C. Finally, fermentation performances of different kinds of dried formulates (SD and ADY) compared with fresh cultures did not show significant differences. The procedure proposed allowed a small-scale production of yeast in continuous operation with relatively simple equipment, and may thus represent a rapid response-on-demand for the production of autochthonous yeasts for local wine-making.

Indexed as

Microbial ViabilityBatch Cell Culture TechniquesBiomassColony Count, MicrobialCulture MediaDesiccationFermentationFood MicrobiologyHot TemperatureHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationMolassesPreservation, BiologicalSaccharomyces cerevisiaeWineCulture MediaAutochthonous wine yeastFermentative capacityFormulationSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSpray-drying

Identifiers

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.