4.3 Review

Into the wild: new yeast genomes from natural environments and new tools for their analysis

期刊

FEMS YEAST RESEARCH
卷 20, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/femsyr/foaa008

关键词

Saccharomyces; Hanseniaspora; Phaffia; Biotechnology; Wild yeast

资金

  1. CONICET [PIP11220130100392CO]
  2. Universidad Nacional del Comahue [B199]
  3. National Science Foundation [DEB-1442148, DEB-1442113]
  4. Howard Hughes Medical Institute through the James H. Gilliam Fellowships for Advanced Study program
  5. USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (Hatch Project) [1020204]
  6. DOE Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center [DE-SC0018409]
  7. Pew Charitable Trusts
  8. Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate Education
  9. Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation
  10. European Union [747775]
  11. Marie Curie Actions (MSCA) [747775] Funding Source: Marie Curie Actions (MSCA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Genomic studies of yeasts from the wild have increased considerably in the past few years. This revolution has been fueled by advances in high-throughput sequencing technologies and a better understanding of yeast ecology and phylogeography, especially for biotechnologically important species. The present review aims to first introduce new bioinformatic tools available for the generation and analysis of yeast genomes. We also assess the accumulated genomic data of wild isolates of industrially relevant species, such as Saccharomyces spp., which provide unique opportunities to further investigate the domestication processes associated with the fermentation industry and opportunistic pathogenesis. The availability of genome sequences of other less conventional yeasts obtained from the wild has also increased substantially, including representatives of the phyla Ascomycota (e.g. Hanseniaspora) and Basidiomycota (e.g. Phaffia). Here, we review salient examples of both fundamental and applied research that demonstrate the importance of continuing to sequence and analyze genomes of wild yeasts.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据