4.6 Article

Yeast species associated with orange juice: Evaluation of different identification methods

Journal

APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 68, Issue 4, Pages 1955-1961

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.68.4.1955-1961.2002

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Five different methods were used to identify yeast isolates from a variety of citrus juice sources. A total of 99 strains, including reference strains, were identified using a partial sequence of the 26S rRNA gene, restriction pattern analysis of the internal transcribed spacer region (5.8S-ITS), classical methodology, the RapID Yeast Plus system, and API 20C AUX. Twenty-three different species were identified representing 11 different genera. Distribution of the species was considerably different depending on the type of sample. Fourteen different species were identified from pasteurized single-strength orange juice that had been contaminated after pasteurization (PSOJ), while only six species were isolated from fresh-squeezed, unpasteurized orange juice (FSOJ). Among PSOJ isolates, Candida intermedia and Candida parapsilosis were the predominant species. Hanseniaspora occidentalis and Hanseniaspora uvarum represented up to 73% of total FSOJ isolates. Partial sequence of the 26S rRNA gene yielded the best results in terms of correct identification, followed by classical techniques and 5.8S-ITS analysis. The commercial identification kits RapID Yeast Plus system and API 20C AUX were able to correctly identify only 35 and 13% of the isolates, respectively. Six new 5.8S-ITS profiles were described, corresponding to Clavispora lusitaniae, Geotrichum citri-aurantii, H. occidentalis, H. vineae, Pichia fermentans, and Saccharomycopsis crataegensis. With the addition of these new profiles to the existing database, the use of 5.8S-ITS sequence became the best tool for rapid and accurate identification of yeast isolates from orange juice.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available