Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31830254›Full record

ReviewFEMS yeast research2020

Tasting the terroir of wine yeast innovation.

I S Pretorius

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in FEMS yeast research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Profiling Potential Wine Yeast Starters fromJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Microbial communities from distinctFrontiers in fungal biology · 2025
    Article
  8. Comparative adaptability of 307Frontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Occurrence and Persistence ofMicroorganisms · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. The Effect of Co-Culture with DifferentFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Biochemical Traits,Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  19. Native Non-Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  20. 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

1 author.

I S PretoriusARC Centre of Excellence in Synthetic Biology, Macquarie University, 19 Eastern Road, North Ryde, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wine is an archetypal traditional fermented beverage with strong territorial and socio-cultural connotations. Its 7000 year history is patterned by a tradition of innovation. Every value-adding innovation - whether in the vineyard, winery, supply chain or marketplace - that led to the invention of a new tradition spurred progress and created a brighter future from past developments. In a way, wine traditions can be defined as remembered innovations from the distant past - inherited knowledge and wisdom that withstood the test of time. Therefore, it should not be assumed a priori that tradition and innovation are polar opposites. The relations between the forces driven by the anchors of tradition and the wings of innovation do not necessarily involve displacement, conflict or exclusiveness. Innovation can strengthen wine tradition, and the reinvention of a tradition-bound practice, approach or concept can foster innovation. In cases where a paradigm-shifting innovation disrupts a tradition, the process of such an innovation transitioning into a radically new tradition can become protracted while proponents of divergent opinions duke it out. Sometimes these conflicting opinions are based on fact, and sometimes not. The imperfections of such a debate between the 'ancients' and the 'moderns' can, from time to time, obscure the line between myth and reality. Therefore, finding the right balance between traditions worth keeping and innovations worth implementing can be complex. The intent here is to harness the creative tension between science fiction and science fact when innovation's first-principles challenge the status quo by re-examining the foundational principles about a core traditional concept, such as terroir. Poignant questions are raised about the importance of the terroir (biogeography) of yeasts and the value of the microbiome of grapes to wine quality. This article imagines a metaphorical terroir free from cognitive biases where diverse perspectives can converge to uncork the effervescent power of territorial yeast populations as well as 'nomadic' yeast starter cultures. At the same time, this paper also engages in mental time-travel. A future scenario is imagined, explored, tested and debated where terroir-less yeast avatars are equipped with designer genomes to safely and consistently produce, individually or in combination with region-specific wild yeasts and or other starter cultures, high-quality wine according to the preferences of consumers in a range of markets. The purpose of this review is to look beyond the horizon and to synthesize a link between what we know now and what could be. This article informs readers where to look without suggesting what they must see as a way forward. In the context of one of the world's oldest fermentation industries - steeped in a rich history of tradition and innovation - the mantra here is: respect the past, lead the present and secure the future of wine.

Indexed as

FermentationBiodiversityFood MicrobiologyMicrobiotaSaccharomyces cerevisiaeVitisWineavatar yeastbiogeographymicrobial terroirmicrobiomenon-SaccharomycesSaccharomyces cerevisiaesynthetic genomicswine yeastyeastome

Identifiers

PMID31830254
PMCPMC6964221

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.