» Articles » PMID: 24489712

QTL Dissection of Lag Phase in Wine Fermentation Reveals a New Translocation Responsible for Saccharomyces Cerevisiae Adaptation to Sulfite

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2014 Feb 4
PMID 24489712
Citations 49
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Quantitative genetics and QTL mapping are efficient strategies for deciphering the genetic polymorphisms that explain the phenotypic differences of individuals within the same species. Since a decade, this approach has been applied to eukaryotic microbes such as Saccharomyces cerevisiae in order to find natural genetic variations conferring adaptation of individuals to their environment. In this work, a QTL responsible for lag phase duration in the alcoholic fermentation of grape juice was dissected by reciprocal hemizygosity analysis. After invalidating the effect of some candidate genes, a chromosomal translocation affecting the lag phase was brought to light using de novo assembly of parental genomes. This newly described translocation (XV-t-XVI) involves the promoter region of ADH1 and the gene SSU1 and confers an increased expression of the sulfite pump during the first hours of alcoholic fermentation. This translocation constitutes another adaptation route of wine yeast to sulfites in addition to the translocation VIII-t-XVI previously described. A population survey of both translocation forms in a panel of domesticated yeast strains suggests that the translocation XV-t-XVI has been empirically selected by human activity.

Citing Articles

The distribution of beneficial mutational effects between two sister yeast species poorly explains natural outcomes of vineyard adaptation.

Longan E, Fay J Genetics. 2024; .

PMID: 39373582 PMC: 11631397. DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyae160.


The distribution of beneficial mutational effects between two sister yeast species poorly explains natural outcomes of vineyard adaptation.

Longan E, Fay J bioRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 38895255 PMC: 11185594. DOI: 10.1101/2024.06.03.597243.


Copper-based grape pest management has impacted wine aroma.

De Guidi I, Galeote V, Blondin B, Legras J Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):10124.

PMID: 38698114 PMC: 11066116. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-60335-9.


Domestication signatures in the non-conventional yeast .

Villarreal P, ODonnell S, Agier N, Munoz-Guzman F, Benavides-Parra J, Urbina K mSystems. 2023; 9(1):e0105823.

PMID: 38085042 PMC: 10805023. DOI: 10.1128/msystems.01058-23.


Endo metabolomic profiling of and wine yeasts reveals a positive correlation between intracellular metabolite load and the specific glycolytic flux during wine fermentation.

Vion C, Brambati M, Da Costa G, Richard T, Marullo P Front Microbiol. 2023; 14:1227520.

PMID: 37928666 PMC: 10620685. DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1227520.


References
1.
Agarwal S, Tafel A, Kanaar R . DNA double-strand break repair and chromosome translocations. DNA Repair (Amst). 2006; 5(9-10):1075-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2006.05.029. View

2.
Brem R, Yvert G, Clinton R, Kruglyak L . Genetic dissection of transcriptional regulation in budding yeast. Science. 2002; 296(5568):752-5. DOI: 10.1126/science.1069516. View

3.
Yuasa N, Nakagawa Y, Hayakawa M, Iimura Y . Two alleles of the sulfite resistance genes are differentially regulated in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2005; 69(8):1584-8. DOI: 10.1271/bbb.69.1584. View

4.
Jackson S . Sensing and repairing DNA double-strand breaks. Carcinogenesis. 2002; 23(5):687-96. DOI: 10.1093/carcin/23.5.687. View

5.
Casalone E, Colella C, Daly S, Gallori E, Moriani L, Polsinelli M . Mechanism of resistance to sulphite in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Curr Genet. 1992; 22(6):435-40. DOI: 10.1007/BF00326407. View