4.7 Article

Microbial niches in raw ingredients determine microbial community assembly during kimchi fermentation

期刊

FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 318, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.126481

关键词

Kimchi; Microbial community assembly; Lactic acid bacteria; Metataxonomics; Metabolomics

资金

  1. World Institute of Kimchi - Ministry of Science and ICT [KE2001-2]
  2. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, Republic of Korea [2018R1D1A1A09082921]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2018R1D1A1A09082921] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fermented foods constitute hubs of microbial consortia differentially affecting nutritional and organoleptic properties, quality, and safety. Here we show the origin source of fermentative microbes and fermentation dynamics of kimchi. We partitioned microbiota by raw ingredient (kimchi cabbage, garlic, ginger, and red pepper) to render kimchi fermented by each source-originated microbe pool and applied multi-omics (metataxonomics and metabolomics), bacterial viability, and physiochemical analyses to longitudinally collected samples. Only kimchi cabbage- and garlic-derived microbial inoculums yielded successful kimchi fermentations. The dominant fermentative microbial taxa and subsequent metabolic outputs differed by raw ingredient type: the genus Leuconostoc, Weissella, and Lactobacillus for all non-sterilized ingredients, garlic, and kimchi cabbage, respectively. Gnotobiotic kimchi inoculated by mono-, di-, and tri- isolated fermentative microbe combinations further revealed W. koreensis-mediated reversible microbial metabolic outputs. The results suggest that the raw ingredient microbial habitat niches selectively affect microbial community assembly patterns and processes during kimchi fermentation.

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