A combined meta-barcoding and shotgun metagenomic analysis of spontaneous wine fermentation

GigaScience

Volumn 6, Issue 7, 2017, Pages

  Sternes, Peter R ^a,c   Lee, Danna ^a,d   Kutyna, Dariusz R ^a   Borneman, Anthony R ^a,b  

^a AUSTRALIAN WINE RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE   (Australia)

^c QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

^d UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Metagenomics; Phylotyping; Wine; Yeast diversity

Indexed keywords

DNA BARCODING; FERMENTATION; GENETICS; METABOLISM; METAGENOME; MICROBIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE; WINE;

DNA BARCODING, TAXONOMIC; FERMENTATION; METAGENOME; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE; WINE;

EID: 85028413282     PISSN: None     EISSN: 2047217X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/gigascience/gix040     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Fleet GH. Wine yeasts for the future. FEMS Yeast Res 2008;8:979-95
2. Beltran G, Torija MJ, Novo M et al. Analysis of yeast populations during alcoholic fermentation: a six year follow-up study. Syst Appl Microbiol 2002;25:287-93
3. Combina M, Elía A, Mercado L et al. Dynamics of indigenous yeast populations during spontaneous fermentation of wines from Mendoza, Argentina. Int J Food Microbiol 2005;99:237-43
4. Fleet GH. Growth of yeasts during wine fermentations. J Wine Res 1990;1:211-23
5. Fleet GH, Lafon-Lafourcade S, Ribéreau-Gayon P. Evolution of yeasts and lactic acid bacteria during fermentation and storage of Bordeaux wines. Appl Environ Microbiol 1984;48: 1034-8
6. Martini A, Ciani M, Scorzetti G. Direct enumeration and isolation of wine yeasts from grape surfaces. Am J Enol Vitic 1996;47:435-40
7. Mortimer R, Polsinelli M. On the origins of wine yeast. Res Microbiol 1999;150:199-204
8. Caporaso JG, Lauber CL, Walters WA et al. Global patterns of 16S rRNA diversity at a depth of millions of sequences per sample. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011; 108(suppl 1):4516-22
9. Bokulich NA, Mills DA. Improved selection of internal transcribed spacer-specific primers enables quantitative, ultrahigh-throughput profiling of fungal communities. Appl Environ Microbiol 2013;79:2519-26
10. Bokulich NA, Joseph CML, Allen G et al. Next-generation sequencing reveals significant bacterial diversity of botrytized wine. PLoS One 2012;7:e36357
11. Bokulich NA, Thorngate JH, Richardson PM et al. Microbial biogeography of wine grapes is conditioned by cultivar, vintage, and climate. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014;111:E139-48
12. Pinto C, Pinho D, Cardoso R et al. Wine fermentation microbiome: a landscape from different Portuguese wine appellations. Front Microbiol 2015;6:905
13. Taylor MW, Tsai P, Anfang N et al. Pyrosequencing reveals regional differences in fruit-associated fungal communities. Environ Microbiol 2014;16:2848-58
14. Bokulich NA, Collins TS, Masarweh C et al. Associations among wine grape microbiome, metabolome, and fermentation behavior suggest microbial contribution to regional wine characteristics. mBio 2016;7:e00631-16
15. Pinto AJ, Raskin L. PCR biases distort bacterial and archaeal community structure in pyrosequencing datasets. PLoS One 2012;7:e43093
16. Sharpton TJ. An introduction to the analysis of shotgun metagenomic data. Front Plant Sci 2014;5:209
17. Sternes PR, Lee D, Kutyna DR et al. Supporting data for "A combined meta-barcoding and shotgun metagenomic analysis of spontaneous wine fermentation". GigaScience Database 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.5524/100309
18. Edgar RC. Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics 2010;26:2460-1
19. Mahé F, Rognes T, Quince C et al. Swarm: robust and fast clustering method for amplicon-based studies. Peer J 2014;2:e593
20. Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods 2010;7:335-6
21. Cordero-Bueso G, Arroyo T, Serrano A et al. Influence of the farming system and vine variety on yeast communities associated with grape berries. Int J Food Microbiol 2011;145:132-9
22. Cordero-Bueso G, Arroyo T, Valero E. A long term field study of the effect of fungicides penconazole and sulfur on yeasts in the vineyard. Int J Food Microbiol 2014;189:189-94
23. Martins G, Vallance J, Mercier A et al. Influence of the farming system on the epiphytic yeasts and yeast-like fungi colonizing grape berries during the ripening process. Int J Food Microbiol 2014;177:21-8
24. Setati ME, Jacobson D, Andong U-C et al. The vineyard yeast microbiome, a mixed model microbial map. PLoS One 2012;7:e52609
25. Segata N, Waldron L, Ballarini A et al. Metagenomic microbial community profiling using unique clade-specific marker genes. Nat Methods 2012;9:811-4
26. Martins G, Lauga B, Miot-Sertier C et al. Characterization of epiphytic bacterial communities from grapes, leaves, bark and soil of grapevine plants grown, and their relations. PLoS One 2013;8:e73013
27. Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 2014;30:2114-20
28. Martin M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from highthroughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J 2011;17:10
29. Magoč T, Salzberg SL. FLASH: fast length adjustment of short reads to improve genome assemblies. Bioinformatics 2011;27:2957-63
30. http://hannonlab.cshl.edu/fastx toolkit/
31. McMurdie PJ, Holmes S. phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics ofmicrobiome census data. PLoS One 2013;8:e61217
32. Jaillon O, Aury J-M, Noel B et al. The grapevine genome sequence suggests ancestral hexaploidization in major angiosperm phyla. Nature 2007;449:463-7
33. Langmead B, Salzberg SL. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat Methods 2012;9:357-9
34. Quinlan AR, Hall IM. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics 2010;26:841-2
35. Li H, Handsaker B, Wysoker A et al. The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 2009;25:2078-9
36. Bankevich A, Nurk S, Antipov D et al. SPAdes: a new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing. J Comput Biol 2012;19:455-77