ArticleScientific reports2020
The establishment of a fungal consortium in a new winery.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distinct bacterial and fungal communities linked to functional potential in fermented fish and vegetables.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Microbiome and Microbiota Within Wineries: A Review.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Changes in Microbial Community Diversity and the Formation Mechanism of Flavor Metabolites in Industrial-Scale Spontaneous Fermentation of Cabernet Sauvignon Wines.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- One hundred unanswered questions on the dispersal ecology of fungi.The ISME journal · 2025Article
- What IsMicroorganisms · 2022Review
- Diversity of Microfungi in a High Radon Cave Ecosystem.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Fungal Diversity and Composition of the Continental Solar Saltern in Añana Salt Valley (Spain).Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Lebanon's Native OenologicalJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The biodiversity and evolution of fungal communities were monitored over a period of 3 vintages in a new winery. Samples were collected before grape receipt and 3 months after fermentation from 3 different wine related environments (WRE): floor, walls and equipment and analyzed using Illumina Mi-Seq. Genera of mold and filamentous fungi (294), non-enological (10) and wine-associated yeasts (25) were detected on all WREs before the arrival of the first harvest. Among them, genera like Alternaria and Aureobasidium persisted during two vintages. Therefore, these genera are not specific to winery environment and appear to be adapted to natural or anthropic environments due to their ubiquitous character. Some genera like Candida were also detected before the first harvest but only on one WREs, whereas, on the other WREs they were found after the harvest. The ubiquitous character and phenotypic traits of these fungal genera can explain their dynamics. After the first harvest and during 3 vintages the initial consortium was enriched by oenological genera like Starmerella introduced either by harvest or by potential transfers between the different WREs. However, these establishing genera, including Saccharomyces, do not appear to persist due to their low adaptation to the stressful conditions of winery environment.
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.