4.7 Article

Identification and Characterization of Non-Saccharomyces Species Isolated from Port Wine Spontaneous Fermentations

期刊

FOODS
卷 9, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/foods9020120

关键词

non-Saccharomyces; wine yeasts; Port wine; native yeasts; strain characterization

资金

  1. European Union [POCI-01-0247-FEDER-017736]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In winemaking, non-Saccharomyces yeast species contribute important organoleptic complexity. Current interest focuses on abundant and dominant strains characteristically present in the early phase of spontaneous alcoholic fermentations. Non-Saccharomyces species are particularly relevant in Port wine production such that the fermentation is prematurely stopped, after the metabolism of only one half of the available sugar, through fortification with aguardente. This work aimed to isolate, identify and characterize non-Saccharomyces species present in spontaneously fermenting Port. To accomplish these goals, yeasts were isolated from a selection of frozen must samples (2012-2016 harvests), using a pre-screening process choosing only the best candidates based on the organoleptic quality of the corresponding fortified wine. From five hundred non-Saccharomyces isolates, twelve species were identified. The three most abundant species, Hanseniaspora uvarum, Lachancea thermotolerans, and Metschnikowia pulcherrima, representing 89% of the isolates, exhibited particularly high diversity with high growth performance variability when exposed to typical stress conditions associated with common enological parameters. Less abundant species included Issatchenkia orientalis, Torulaspora delbrueckii, Hanseniaspora vineae, Hanseniaspora osmophila, Candida zemplinina, Rhodotorula mucilaginosa, Hanseniaspora guilliermondii, Issatchenkia occidentalis, and Zygosaccharomyces bisporus. This is the first study providing insights into the identification and characterization of non-Saccharomyces species responsible for spontaneous Port wine production.

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

4.7
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