Advertisement

Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology

, Volume 102, Issue 2, pp 921–932 | Cite as

Application of directed evolution to develop ethanol tolerant Oenococcus oeni for more efficient malolactic fermentation

  • Alice L. Betteridge
  • Krista M. Sumby
  • Joanna F. Sundstrom
  • Paul R. Grbin
  • Vladimir JiranekEmail author
Applied microbial and cell physiology

Abstract

Malolactic fermentation (MLF) is an important step in winemaking, which can be notoriously unreliable due to the fastidious nature of Oenococcus oeni. This study aimed to use directed evolution (DE) to produce a more robust strain of O. oeni having the ability to withstand high ethanol concentrations. DE involves an organism mutating and potentially adapting to a high stress environment over the course of extended cultivation. A continuous culture of O. oeni was established and exposed to progressively increasing ethanol content such that after approximately 330 generations, an isolate from this culture was able to complete MLF in high ethanol content medium earlier than its parent. The ethanol tolerance of a single isolate, A90, was tested to confirm the phenotype and its fermentation performance in wine. In order to investigate the genotypic differences in the evolved strain that led to the ethanol tolerance phenotype, the relative expression of a number of known stress response genes was compared between SB3 and A90. Notably, there was increase in hsp18 expression in 20% (v/v) ethanol by both strains with A90 exhibiting a higher degree of expression. This study is the first to use directed evolution for O. oeni strain improvement and confirms that this technique can be used successfully for the development of new candidate strains for the wine industry. This study also adds to the current knowledge on the genetic basis of ethanol tolerance in this bacterium.

Keywords

Oenococcus Wine Ethanol Stress response Directed evolution Malolactic fermentation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

VJ conceived the project. ALB performed the DE, screening of isolates and fermentation experiments, and analysed the data. KMS performed qPCR experiments, and analysed and interpreted the data. JFS performed strain passaging and phenotype stability experiments and analysed the data. ALB, KMS and JFS wrote and edited the manuscript. PRG and VJ revised and edited the manuscript.

Funding information

Strain SB3 was kindly donated by Laffort Australia PTY LTD. This research was supported by Australia’s grapegrowers and winemakers through their investment body, Wine Australia (formerly Australian Grape and Wine Authority), with matching funds from the Australian Government. The University of Adelaide is a member of the Wine Innovation Cluster. Part of VJ’s contribution to this work was made via ARC project IC130100005.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

ALB was supported by scholarships from AGWA (UA1101/P3102/GWR Ph 0901) and the University of Adelaide. KMS and JFS are supported by Wine Australia project funding (UA1302). The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Human and animal rights and informed consent

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Supplementary material

253_2017_8593_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (620 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 620 kb)

References

  1. Bachmann H, Starrenburg MJ, Molenaar D, Kleerebezem M, van Hylckama Vlieg JE (2012) Microbial domestication signatures of Lactococcus lactis can be reproduced by experimental evolution. Genome Res 22:115–124CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Bauer R, Dicks LMT (2004) Control of malolactic fermentation in wine. A review S Afr J Enol Vitic 25:74–88Google Scholar
  3. Beltramo C, Desroche N, Tourdot-Marechal R, Grandvalet C, Guzzo J (2006) Real-time PCR for characterizing the stress response of Oenococcus oeni in a wine-like medium. Res Microbiol 157:267–274CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Betteridge A, Grbin P, Jiranek V (2015) Improving Oenococcus oeni to overcome challenges of wine malolactic fermentation. Trends Biotechnol 33:547–553CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Boehringer-Mannheim (1995) L-malic acid. In: GmbH B-M (ed) Methods of enzymatic bioanalysis and food analysis. Mannheim, Germany, pp 98–99Google Scholar
  6. Bordas M, Araque I, Bordons A, Reguant C (2015) Differential expression of selected Oenococcus oeni genes for adaptation in wine-like media and red wine. Ann Microbiol 65:2277–2285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cafaro C, Bonomo MG, Salzano G (2014) Adaptive changes in geranylgeranyl pyrophosphate synthase gene expression level under ethanol stress conditions in Oenococcus oeni. J Appl Microbiol 116:71–80CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Foster PL (1999) Mechanisms of stationary phase mutation: a decade of adaptive mutation. Annu Rev Genet 33:57–88CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Godden P, Muhlack R (2010) Trends in the composition of Australian wine, 1984-2008. Aust NZ Grapegrow Winemak 558:47–61Google Scholar
  10. Godden P, Wilkes E, Johnson D (2015) Trends in the composition of Australian wine 1984–2014. Aust J Grape Wine Res 21:741–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Grandvalet C, Assad-Garcia JS, Chu-Ky S, Tollot M, Guzzo J, Gresti J, Tourdot-Marechal R (2008) Changes in membrane lipid composition in ethanol- and acid-adapted Oenococcus oeni cells: characterization of the cfa gene by heterologous complementation. Microbiology 154:2611–2619CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Guzzo J (2011) Stress responses of Oenococcus oeni. In: Tsakalidou E, Papadimitriou K (eds) Stress responses of lactic acid bacteria. Food microbiology and food safety. Springer US, pp 349–365Google Scholar
  13. Guzzo J, Jobin MP, Delmas F, Fortier LC, Garmyn D, Tourdot-Maréchal R, Lee B, Diviès C (2000) Regulation of stress response in Oenococcus oeni as a function of environmental changes and growth phase. Int J Food Microbiol 55:27–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hagi T, Kobayashi M, Kawamoto S, Shima J, Nomura M (2013) Expression of novel carotenoid biosynthesis genes from Enterococcus gilvus improves the multistress tolerance of Lactococcus lactis. J Appl Microbiol 114:1763–1771CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Maitre M, Weidmann S, Dubois-Brissonnet F, David V, Covès J, Guzzo J (2014) Adaptation of the wine bacterium Oenococcus oeni to ethanol stress: role of the small heat shock protein Lo18 in membrane integrity. Appl Environ Microbiol 80:2973–2980CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Makarova K, Slesarev A, Wolf Y, Sorokin A, Mirkin B, Koonin E, Pavlov A, Pavlova N, Karamychev V, Polouchine N, Shakhova V, Grigoriev I, Lou Y, Rohksar D, Lucas S, Huang K, Goodstein DM, Hawkins T, Plengvidhya V, Welker D, Hughes J, Goh Y, Benson A, Baldwin K, Lee JH, Díaz-Muñiz I, Dosti B, Smeianov V, Wechter W, Barabote R, Lorca G, Altermann E, Barrangou R, Ganesan B, Xie Y, Rawsthorne H, Tamir D, Parker C, Breidt F, Broadbent J, Hutkins R, O’Sullivan D, Steele J, Unlu G, Saier M, Klaenhammer T, Richardson P, Kozyavkin S, Weimer B, Mills D (2006) Comparative genomics of the lactic acid bacteria. PNAS 103:15611–15616CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Makarova KS, Koonin EV (2007) Evolutionary genomics of lactic acid bacteria. J Bacteriol 189:1199–1208CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Marcobal AM, Sela DA, Wolf YI, Makarova KS, Mills DA (2008) Role of hypermutability in the evolution of the genus Oenococcus. J Bacteriol 190:564–570CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Margalef-Catalá M, Araque I, Bordons A, Reguant C, Bautista-Gallego J (2016) Transcriptomic and proteomic analysis of Oenococcus oeni adaptation to wine stress conditions. Front Microbiol 7:1554.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.01554 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Miller JH (1996) Spontaneous mutators in bacteria: insights into pathways of mutagenesis and repair. Annu Rev Microbiol 50:625–643CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Olguín N, Bordons A, Reguant C (2009) Influence of ethanol and pH on the gene expression of the citrate pathway in Oenococcus oeni. Food Microbiol 26:197–203CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Olguín N, Bordons A, Reguant C (2010) Multigenic expression analysis as an approach to understanding the behaviour of Oenococcus oeni in wine-like conditions. Int J Food Microbiol 144:88–95CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Olguín N, Champomier-Vergès M, Anglade P, Baraige F, Cordero-Otero R, Bordons A, Zagorec M, Reguant C (2015) Transcriptomic and proteomic analysis of Oenococcus oeni PSU-1 response to ethanol shock. Food Microbiol 51:87–95CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Oliver A, Baquero F, Blázquez J (2002) The mismatch repair system (mutS, mutL and uvrD genes) in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: molecular characterization of naturally occurring mutants. Mol Microbiol 43:1641–1650CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Rosenberg SM, Hastings P (2003) Modulating mutation rates in the wild. Science 300:1382–1383CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Sumby KM, Grbin PR, Jiranek V (2012) Validation of the use of multiple internal control genes, and the application of real-time quantitative PCR, to study esterase gene expression in Oenococcus oeni. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 96:1039–1047CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Sumby KM, Grbin PR, Jiranek V (2014) Implications of new research and technologies for malolactic fermentation in wine. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 98:8111–8132CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Teixeira H, Goncalves M, Rozes N, Ramos A, San Romao M (2002) Lactobacillic acid accumulation in the plasma membrane of Oenococcus oeni: a response to ethanol stress? Microb Ecol 43:146–153CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Teusink B, Wiersma A, Jacobs L, Notebaart RA, Smid EJ (2009) Understanding the adaptive growth strategy of Lactobacillus plantarum by in silico optimisation. PLoS Comput Biol 5:e1000410CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Wen-Ying Z, Zhen-Kui K (2013) Advanced progress on adaptive stress response of Oenococcus oeni. J Northeast Agric Univ 20:91–96Google Scholar
  31. Yang D, Woese CR (1989) Phylogenetic structure of the “leuconostocs”: an interesting case of a rapidly evolving organism. Syst Appl Microbiol 12:145–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zapparoli G, Tosi E, Azzolini M, Vagnoli P, Krieger S (2009) Bacterial inoculation strategies for the achievement of malolactic fermentation in high-alcohol wines. S Afr J Enol Vitic 30:49–55Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Wine and Food Science, School of Agriculture, Food and WineUniversity of Adelaide, Waite CampusUrrbraeAustralia
  2. 2.Australian Research Council Training Centre for Innovative Wine ProductionUrrbraeAustralia

Personalised recommendations