Improving Oenococcus oeni to overcome challenges of wine malolactic fermentation

Trends in Biotechnology

Volumn 33, Issue 9, 2015, Pages 547-553

  Betteridge, Alice ^a   Grbin, Paul ^a   Jiranek, Vladimir ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Lactic acid bacteria; Malolactic fermentation; Physiochemical stress; Wine biotechnology

Indexed keywords

BACILLI; FERMENTATION; LACTIC ACID; PROCESSING; SULFUR DIOXIDE; THERMAL PROCESSING (FOODS);

DIRECTED EVOLUTION; LACTIC ACID BACTERIA; LOW PROCESSING TEMPERATURE; MALOLACTIC FERMENTATION; NUTRITIONAL SUPPLEMENTS; OPTIMIZATION STRATEGY; PHYSIO-CHEMICAL; STRAIN SELECTION;

WINE;

ALCOHOL; MALIC ACID; SULFUR DIOXIDE; LACTIC ACID;

EXON SHUFFLING; FERMENTATION; FERMENTATION OPTIMIZATION; GENE OVEREXPRESSION; GENETIC STRAIN; MALOLACTIC FERMENTATION; MOLECULAR GENETICS; MUTAGENESIS; NONHUMAN; OENOCOCCUS OENI; PH; PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTON MOTIVE FORCE; REVIEW; STARTER CULTURE; WINE; WINE INDUSTRY; BIOREACTOR; DNA SHUFFLING; ENZYMOLOGY; GENETICS; METABOLIC ENGINEERING; METABOLISM; MICROBIOLOGY; OENOCOCCUS; PROCEDURES;

OENOCOCCUS OENI;

BIOREACTORS; DNA SHUFFLING; FERMENTATION; LACTIC ACID; METABOLIC ENGINEERING; MUTAGENESIS; OENOCOCCUS; WINE;

EID: 84940452765     PISSN: 01677799     EISSN: 18793096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2015.06.008     Document Type: Review

References (66)

1. Sumby K.M., et al. Microbial modulation of aromatic esters in wine: current knowledge and future prospects. Food Chem. 2010, 121:1-16.
2. Malherbe S., et al. Comparative metabolic profiling to investigate the contribution of O. oeni MLF starter cultures to red wine composition. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2012, 39:477-494.
3. Chu-Ky S., et al. Combined cold, acid, ethanol shocks in Oenococcus oeni: effects on membrane fluidity and cell viability. Biochim. Biophys. 2005, 1717:118-124.
4. Olguín N., et al. Multigenic expression analysis as an approach to understanding the behaviour of Oenococcus oeni in wine-like conditions. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2010, 144:88-95.
5. Giraffa G., et al. Importance of lactobacilli in food and feed biotechnology. Res. Microbiol. 2010, 161:480-487.
6. Dicks L.T.M. Transformation of Leuconostoc oenos by electroporation. Biotechnol. Tech. 1994, 8:901-904.
7. Assad-Garcia J.S., et al. An improved protocol for electroporation of Oenococcus oeni ATCC BAA-1163 using ethanol as immediate membrane fluidizing agent. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2008, 47:333-338.
8. Beltramo C., et al. A new vector, pGID052, for genetic transfer in Oenococcus oeni. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2004, 236:53-60.
9. Spath K., et al. Lactobacillus plantarum and Lactobacillus buchneri as expression systems: evaluation of different origins of replication for the design of suitable shuttle vectors. Mol. Biotechnol. 2012, 52:40-48.
10. Favier M., et al. Identification of pOENI-1 and related plasmids in Oenococcus oeni strains performing the malolactic fermentation in wine. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e49082.
11. Rodríguez M.C., et al. The use of the replication region of plasmid pRS7 from Oenococcus oeni as a putative tool to generate cloning vectors for lactic acid bacteria. Plasmid 2015, 77:28-31.
12. Doria F., et al. Development of a new method for detection and identification of Oenococcus oeni bacteriophages based on endolysin gene sequence and randomly amplified polymorphic DNA. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2013, 79:4799-4805.
13. Machielsen R., et al. Molecular description and industrial potential of Tn6098 conjugative transfer conferring α-galactoside metabolism in Lactococcus lactis. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2011, 77:555-563.
14. Zúñiga M., et al. Conjugative plasmid pIP501 undergoes specific deletions after transfer from Lactococcus lactis to Oenococcus oeni. Arch. Microbiol. 2003, 180:367-373.
15. Peterbauer C., et al. Food-grade gene expression in lactic acid bacteria. Biotechnol. J. 2011, 6:1147-1161.
16. LeBlanc J., et al. Risk assessment of genetically modified lactic acid bacteria using the concept of substantial equivalence. Curr. Microbiol. 2010, 61:590-595.
17. Bridier J., et al. Evidence of distinct populations and specific subpopulations within the species Oenococcus oeni. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2010, 76:7754-7764.
18. Borneman A.R., et al. Comparative analysis of the Oenococcus oeni pan genome reveals genetic diversity in industrially-relevant pathways. BMC Genomics 2012, 13:373.
19. Makarova K., et al. Comparative genomics of the lactic acid bacteria. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006, 103:15611-15616.
20. van Kranenburg R., et al. Flavour formation from amino acids by lactic acid bacteria: predictions from genome sequence analysis. Int. Dairy J. 2002, 12:111-121.
21. Liu M., et al. Comparative genomics of enzymes in flavor-forming pathways from amino acids in lactic acid bacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2008, 74:4590-4600.
22. Bartowsky E., Borneman A. Genomic variations of Oenococcus oeni strains and the potential to impact on malolactic fermentation and aroma compounds in wine. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2011, 92:441-447.
23. Bon E., et al. Oenococcus oeni genome plasticity is associated with fitness. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2009, 75:2079-2090.
24. Branco dos Santos F., et al. Towards metagenome-scale models for industrial applications - the case of lactic acid bacteria. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2013, 24:200-206.
25. Gaspar P., et al. From physiology to systems metabolic engineering for the production of biochemicals by lactic acid bacteria. Biotechnol. Adv. 2013, 31:764-788.
26. Li N., et al. Mutation and selection of Oenococcus oeni for controlling wine malolactic fermentation. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2015, 240:93-100.
27. Rosenberg S.M., Hastings P. Modulating mutation rates in the wild. Science 2003, 300:1382-1383.
28. Kawecki T.J., et al. Experimental evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2012, 27:547-560.
29. Teusink B., et al. Understanding the adaptive growth strategy of Lactobacillus plantarum by in silico optimisation. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2009, 5:e1000410.
30. Bachmann H., et al. Microbial domestication signatures of Lactococcus lactis can be reproduced by experimental evolution. Genome Res. 2012, 22:115-124.
31. Sauer U. Evolutionary engineering of industrially important microbial phenotypes. Metabolic Engineering 2001, 129-169. Springer. J. Nielsen, A. et (Eds.).
32. Mills D.A., et al. Genomic analysis of Oenococcus oeni PSU-1 and its relevance to winemaking. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 2005, 29:465-475.
33. Makarova K.S., Koonin E.V. Evolutionary genomics of lactic acid bacteria. J. Bacteriol. 2007, 189:1199-1208.
34. Miller J.H. Spontaneous mutators in bacteria: insights into pathways of mutagenesis and repair. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 1996, 50:625-643.
35. Oliver A., et al. The mismatch repair system (mutS, mutL and uvrD genes) in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: molecular characterization of naturally occurring mutants. Mol. Microbiol. 2002, 43:1641-1650.
36. Marcobal A.M., et al. Role of hypermutability in the evolution of the genus Oenococcus. J. Bacteriol. 2008, 190:564-570.
37. Bongers R.S., et al. IS981-mediated adaptive evolution recovers lactate production by ldhB transcription activation in a lactate dehydrogenase-deficient strain of Lactococcus lactis. J. Bacteriol. 2003, 185:4499-4507.
38. Kaleta P., et al. Crucial role for insertion sequence elements in Lactobacillus helveticus evolution as revealed by interstrain genomic comparison. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2010, 76:212-220.
39. Betteridge A.L. Enhanced Wine-making Efficiency through Fool-proof Malolactic Fermentation: Evolution of Superior Lactic Acid Bacteria 2015, University of Adelaide.
40. Petri R., Schmidt-Dannert C. Dealing with complexity: evolutionary engineering and genome shuffling. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2004, 15:298-304.
41. Stephanopoulos G. Metabolic engineering by genome shuffling. Nat. Biotechnol. 2002, 20:666-668.
42. John R.P., et al. Genome shuffling of Lactobacillus delbrueckii mutant and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens through protoplasmic fusion for L-lactic acid production from starchy wastes. Bioresour. Technol. 2008, 99:8008-8015.
43. Patnaik R., et al. Genome shuffling of Lactobacillus for improved acid tolerance. Nat. Biotechnol. 2002, 20:707-712.
44. Wang Y., et al. Genome-shuffling improved acid tolerance and L-lactic acid volumetric productivity in Lactobacillus rhamnosus. J. Biotechnol. 2007, 129:510-515.
45. Yu L., et al. Genome shuffling enhanced L-lactic acid production by improving glucose tolerance of Lactobacillus rhamnosus. J. Biotechnol. 2008, 134:154-159.
46. Zhang Y-X., et al. Genome shuffling leads to rapid phenotypic improvement in bacteria. Nature 2002, 415:644-646.
47. Liccioli T., et al. Microvinification - how small can we go?. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2011, 89:1621-1628.
48. Fugelsang K.C. The lactic acid bacteria. Wine Microbiology 1997, 3-47. Chapman & Hall. K.C. Fugelsang (Ed.).
49. Garvie E.I. Leuconostoc oenos sp. nov. J. Gen. Microbiol. 1967, 48:431-438.
50. Henick-Kling T., et al. Sensory aspects of malolactic fermentation. Proceedings of the 8th Australian Wine Industry Technical Conference 1993, 148-152. Winetitles. C.S. Stockley (Ed.).
51. Lafon-Lafourcade S., et al. Lactic acid bacteria of wines: stimulation of growth and malolactic fermentation. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 1983, 49:349-352.
52. Naouri P., et al. Purification and properties of a malolactic enzyme from Leuconostoc oenos ATCC 23278. J. Basic Microbiol. 1990, 30:577-585.
53. Bartowsky E. Oenococcus oeni and malolactic fermentation - moving into the molecular arena. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 2005, 11:174-187.
54. Da Silveira M.G., Abee T. Activity of ethanol-stressed Oenococcus oeni cells: a flow cytometric approach. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2009, 106:1690-1696.
55. Tourdot-Maréchal R., et al. Acid sensitivity of neomycin-resistant mutants of Oenococcus oeni: a relationship between reduction of ATPase activity and lack of malolactic activity. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 1999, 178:319-326.
56. Carrete R., et al. Inhibitory effect of sulfur dioxide and other stress compounds in wine on the ATPase activity of Oenococcus oeni. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2002, 211:155-159.
57. Foster P.L. Mechanisms of stationary phase mutation: a decade of adaptive mutation. Annu. Rev. Genet. 1999, 33:57-88.
58. Rosenberg S.M. Evolving responsively: adaptive mutation. Nature 2001, 2:645.
59. Gordo I., et al. Fitness effects of mutations in bacteria. J. Mol. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2011, 21:20.
60. Muller H.J. The relation of recombination to mutational advance. Mutat. Res. 1964, 106:2-9.
61. Taddei F., et al. Role of mutator alleles in adaptive evolution. Nature 1997, 387:700-702.
62. Cocconcelli P., et al. Intergeneric protoplast fusion in lactic acid bacteria. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 1986, 35:211-214.
63. Hopwood D.A., Wright H.M. Bacterial protoplast fusion: recombination in fused protoplasts of Streptomyces coelicolor. Mol. Gen. Genet. 1978, 162:307-317.
64. Morelli L., et al. Lactobacillus protoplast transformation. Plasmid 1987, 17:73-75.
65. Gong J., et al. Femtosecond laser-induced cell fusion. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2008, 92:093901.
66. del Cardayré S.B. Developments in strain improvement technology. Natural Products: Drug Discovery and Therapeutic Medicine 2005, 107-125. Humana Press. L. Zhang, A.L. Demain (Eds.).