Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The effect of scale on gene expression: commercial versus laboratory wine fermentations

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Molecular and cellular processes that are responsible for industrially relevant phenotypes of fermenting microorganisms are a central focus of biotechnological research. Such research intends to generate insights and solutions for fermentation-based industries with regards to issues such as improving product yield or the quality of the final fermentation product. For logistical reasons, and to ensure data reproducibility, such research is mostly carried out in defined or synthetic media and in small-scale fermentation vessels. Two questions are frequently raised regarding the applicability of this approach to solve problems experienced in industrial fermentations: (1) Is synthetic medium a sufficiently accurate approximation of the generally more complex natural (and frequently highly variable) substrates that are employed in most fermentation-based industries, and (2) can results obtained in small-scale laboratory fermentations be extrapolated to large-scale industrial environments? Here, we address the second question through a comparative transcriptomic approach by assessing the response of an industrial wine yeast strain fermenting a natural grape juice in small-scale laboratory and large-scale industrial conditions. In yeast, transcriptome analysis is arguably the best available tool to holistically assess the physiological state of a population and its response to changing environmental conditions. The data suggest that scale does indeed impact on some environmental parameters such as oxygen availability. However, the data show that small-scale fermentations nevertheless accurately reflect general molecular processes and adaptations during large-scale fermentation and that extrapolation of laboratory datasets to real industrial processes can be justified.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbott DA, Knijnenburg TA, de Poorter LM, Reinders MJ, Pronk JT, van Maris AJ (2007) Generic and specific transcriptional responses to different weak organic acids in anaerobic chemostat cultures of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. FEMS Yeast Res 7:819–833

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Abramova N, Sertil O, Mehta S, Lowry CV (2001) Reciprocal regulation of anaerobic and aerobic cell wall mannoprotein gene expression in Saccharomyces cereivisiae. J Bacteriol 183:2881–2887

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Andréasson C, Neve EP, Ljungdahl PO (2004) Four permeases import proline and the toxic proline analogue azetidine-2-carboxylate into yeast. Yeast 21:193–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attfield PV (1997) Stress tolerance: the key to effective strains of baker’s yeast. Nat Biotechnol 15:1351–1357

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Dor A, Shamir R, Yakhini Z (1999) Clustering gene expression patterns. J Comp Biol 6:281–297

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boer VM, de Winde JH, Pronk JT, Piper MD (2003) The genome-wide transcriptional responses of Saccharomyces cerevisiae grown on glucose in aerobic chemostat cultures limited for carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus or sulfur. J Biol Chem 278:3265–3274

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boulton RB, Singleton VL, Bisson LF, Kunkee RE (1996) Principles and practices of winemaking. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp 200–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Cramer G, Ergül A, Grimplet J, Tillett R, Tattersall E, Bohlman M, Vincent D, Sonderegger J, Evans J, Osborne C, Quilici D, Schlauch K, Schooley D, Cushman J (2007) Water and salinity stress in grape-vines: early and late changes in transcript and metabolite profiles. Funct Integr Genomics 7:111–134

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cullin C, Baudin-Baillieu A, Guillemet E, Ozier-Kalogeropoulos O (1996) Functional analysis of YCL09C: evidence for a role as the regulatory subunit of acetolactate synthase. Yeast 12:1511–1518

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Da Silva FG, Iandolino A, Al-Kayal F, Bohlmann MC, Cushman Ma, Lim H, Ergul A, Figueroa R, Kabuloglu EK, Osborne C, Rowe J, Tattersall E, Leslie A, Xu J, Baek J, Cramer GR, Cushman JC, Cook DR (2005) Characterizing the grape transcriptome. Analysis of expressed sequence tags from multiple Vitis species and development of a compendium of gene expression during berry development. Plant Physiol 139:574–597

  • Denis CL, Young ET (1983) Isolation and characterization of the positive regulatory gene ADR1 from Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Cell Biol 3:360–370

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dickinson JR, Salgado LE, Hewlins MJ (2003) The catabolism of amino acids to long chain and complex alcohols in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Biol Chem 278:8028–8034

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Driesel A, Lommele A, Drescher B, Töpfer R, Bell M, Cartharius I, Cheutin N, Huck J-F, Kubiak J, Regnard P (2003) Towards the transcriptome of grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.). Acta Hort 603:239–250

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duetz WA (2007) Microtiter plates as mini-bioreactors: miniaturization of fermentation methods. Trends Microbiol 15:469–475

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Frezier V, Dubourdieu D (1992) Ecology of yeast strain Saccharomyces cerevisiae during spontaneous fermentation in a Bordeaux winery. Am J Enol Vitic 43:375–380

    Google Scholar 

  • Gasch AP, Werner-Washburne M (2002) The genomics of yeast responses to environmental stress and starvation. Funct Integr Genomics 2:181–192

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gasch A, Spellman P, Kao C, Carmel-Harel O, Eisen M, Storz G, Botstein D, Brown P (2000) Genomic expression changes in the response of yeast cells to environmental changes. Mol Biol Cell 11:4241–4257

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Huang HL, Brandriss MC (2000) The regulator of the yeast proline utilization pathway is differentially phosphorylated in response to the quality of the nitrogen source. Mol Cell Biol 20:892–899

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ideker T, Thorsson V, Ranish JA, Christmas R, Christmas R, Buhler J, Eng JK, Bumgarner R, Goodlett DR, Aebersold R, Hood L (2001) Integrated genomic and proteomic analyses of a systematically perturbed metabolic network. Science 292:929–934

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Iraqui I, Vissers S, Cartiaux M, Urrestarazu A (1998) Characterisation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae ARO8 and ARO9 genes encoding aromatic aminotransferases I and II reveals a new aminotransferase subfamily. Mol Gen Genet 257:238–248

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Köffel R, Tiwari R, Falquet L, Schneiter R (2005) The Saccharomyces cerevisiae YLL012/YEH1, YLR020/YEH2, and TGL1 genes encode a novel family of membrane-anchored lipases that are required for steryl ester hydrolysis. Mol Cell Biol 25:1655–1668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamb DC, Kelly DE, Manning NJ, Kaderbhai MA, Kelly SL (1999) Biodiversity of the P450 catalytic cycle: yeast cytochrome b5/NADH cytochrome b5 reductase complex efficiently drives the entire sterol 14-demethylation (CYP51) reaction. FEBS Lett 462:283–288

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lambrechts MG, Pretorius IS (2000) Yeast and its importance to wine aroma. S Afr J Eno Vitic 21:97–129

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lander ES (1999) Array of hope. Nat Genet 21:3–4

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Landolfo S, Zara G, Zara S, Budroni M, Ciani M, Mannazzu I (2010) Oleic acid and ergosterol supplementation mitigates oxidative stress in wine strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Int J Food Microbiol 141:229–235

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liccioli T, Tran TMT, Cozzolino D, Jiranek V, Chambers PJ, Schmidt SA (2011) Microvinification—how small can we go? Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 89:1621–1628

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mardia KV, Kent JT, Bibby JH (1979) Multivariate analysis. Academic, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Marks VD, Ho Sui SJ, Erasmus D, van den Merwe GK, Brumm J, Wasserman WW, Bryan J, van Vuuren HJJ (2008) Dynamics of the yeast transcriptome during wine fermentation reveals a novel fermentation stress response. FEMS Yeast Res 8:35–52

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen JG, Kielland-Brandt MC, Nilsson-Tillgren T, Bornaes C, Holmberg S (1988) Molecular genetics of serine and threonine catabolism in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics 119:527–534

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rossignol T, Dulau L, Julien A, Blondin B (2003) Genome-wide monitoring of wine yeast gene expression during alcoholic fermentation. Yeast 20:1369–1385

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rossouw D, Bauer FF (2009) Comparing the transcriptomes of wine yeast strains: toward understanding the interaction between environment and transcriptome during fermentation. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 84:937–954

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rossouw D, Naes T, Bauer FF (2008) Linking gene regulation and the exo-metabolome: a comparative transcriptomics approach to identify genes that impact on the production of volatile aroma compounds in yeast. BMC Genomics 9:530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossouw D, Olivares-Hernandes R, Nielsen J, Bauer FF (2009) Comparative transcriptomic approach to investigate differences in wine yeast physiology and metabolism during fermentation. Appl Environ Microbiol 75:6600–6612

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rossouw D, van den Dool AH, Jacobson D, Bauer FF (2010) Comparative transcriptomic and proteomic profiling of industrial wine yeast strains. Appl Environ Microbiol 76:3911–3923

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shobayashi M, Mitsueda SI, Ago M, Fuji T, Iwashita K, Iefuji H (2005) Effects of culture conditions on ergosterol biosynthesis by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 69:2381–2388

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Smyth GK (2004) Linear models and empirical Bayes methods for assessing differential expression in microarray experiments. Stat Appl Genet Molec Biol 3:3

    Google Scholar 

  • Tusher CG, Tibshirani R, Chu G (2001) Significance analysis of microarrays applied to the ionizing radiation response. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:5116–5121

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Valachovic M, Hronská L, Hapala I (2001) Anaerobiosis induces complex changes in sterol esterification pattern in the yeast Saccharomyces cereivisiae. FEMS Microbiol Lett 197:41–45

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Varela C, Cardenas J, Melo F, Agosin E (2005) Quantitative analysis of wine yeast gene expression profiles under winemaking conditions. Yeast 22:369–383

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vestrepen KJ, Van Laere SD, Vanderhaegen BM, Derdelinckx G, Dufour JP, Pretorius IS, Winderickx J, Thevelein JM, Delvaux FR (2003) Expression levels of the yeast alcohol acetyltransferase genes ATF1, Lg-ATF1, and ATF2 control the formation of a broad range of volatile esters. Appl Environ Microbiol 69:5228–5237

    Google Scholar 

  • Young ET, Dombek KM, Tachibana C, Ideker T (2003) Multiple pathways are co-regulated by the protein kinase Snf1 and the transcription factors Adr1 and Cat8. J Biol Chem 28:26146–26158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zara G, Angelozzi D, Belviso S, Bardi L, Goffrini P, Lodi T, Budroni M, Mannazzu I (2009) Oxygen is required to restore flor strain viability and lipid biosynthesis under fermentative conditions. FEMS Yeast Res 9:217–225

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Funding for the research presented in this paper was provided by the NRF (National Research Foundation, South Africa) and Winetech. We would also like to thank Jo McBride and the Cape Town Centre for Proteomic and Genomic Research for the microarray analysis and the staff and students at the IWBT for their support and assistance in numerous areas. Large-scale fermentations were carried out at the Nietvoorbij Research Cellars in collaboration with the ARC (Agricultural Research Council).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Wine Biotechnology, University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch, South Africa

    Debra Rossouw, Dan Jacobson & Florian F. Bauer

  2. ARC Infruitec-Nietvoorbij (The Fruit, Vine and Wine Institute of the Agricultural Research Council), Private Bag X5026, Stellenbosch, 7599, South Africa

    Neil Jolly

Authors
  1. Debra Rossouw
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Neil Jolly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dan Jacobson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Florian F. Bauer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Florian F. Bauer.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESMdocx (DOCX 67 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rossouw, D., Jolly, N., Jacobson, D. et al. The effect of scale on gene expression: commercial versus laboratory wine fermentations. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 93, 1207–1219 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-011-3564-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-011-3564-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation