ArticleMicrobial biotechnology2025
Unveiling the Potential of Lentilactobacillus hilgardii in Malolactic Fermentation: Comparative Genomics and Fermentation Dynamics.
Article in Microbial biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Correction to 'Unveiling the Potential of Lentilactobacillus hilgardii in Malolactic Fermentation: Comparative Genomics and Fermentation Dynamics'.Microbial biotechnology · 2026Article
- Genome-Scale Metabolic Models Guided Improvement of Fermented Milk Quality and Flavor byFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Unveiling the Potential of Lentilactobacillus hilgardii in Malolactic Fermentation: Comparative Genomics and Fermentation Dynamics.Microbial biotechnology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the potential of Lentilactobacillus hilgardii as a novel candidate for malolactic fermentation (MLF) in winemaking, through comparative genomics and experimental validation, in direct comparison with Oenococcus oeni. We performed a pangenome analysis on 16 L. hilgardii and 7 O. oeni strains to explore their genetic diversity, focusing on wine-related traits. Functional predictions were generated using genome-scale metabolic models (ModelSEED/KBase), including in silico co-inoculation with Saccharomyces cerevisiae EC1118 and post-alcoholic fermentation simulations. The reference strains L. hilgardii DSM 20176 and O. oeni DSM 20252 were experimentally tested for MLF performance in a synthetic wine-like medium at 25°C and 10°C. Core-genome comparison revealed that 67.9% of the malolactic enzyme sequence is conserved between the two species, with comparable docking affinity to L-malic acid. L. hilgardii harboured unique enzymes with potential oenological interest (phenolic acid decarboxylase, mannitol dehydrogenase, glucosidase) and distinctive stress-related proteins (YaaA, HrcA, ASP23), suggesting improved tolerance to oxidative, temperature, and alkaline stresses. Notably, L. hilgardii showed genomic potential to degrade putrescine, arginine, and ornithine, precursors of ethyl carbamate. Experimentally, L. hilgardii reduced L-malic acid from 2.5 g/L to < 0.1 g/L within 12 days at 10°C, while O. oeni showed no MLF activity at this temperature. At 25°C, both strains completed MLF within 6-7 days. L. hilgardii also consumed > 80% of residual fructose at 10°C, whereas O. oeni showed minimal utilisation. Our results demonstrate that L. hilgardii combines a favourable genomic repertoire for wine adaptation with superior MLF performance at low temperature, suggesting its potential as an alternative to O. oeni in cool-climate winemaking. This work provides the first genome-scale comparative and functional evaluation of L. hilgardii in the winemaking context, highlighting its technological promise to improve fermentation reliability, reduce spoilage risk, and expand the biodiversity of malolactic starters.
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.