Next Article in Journal
A Review on the Extraction and Processing of Natural Source-Derived Proteins through Eco-Innovative Approaches
Next Article in Special Issue
Versatility of Saccharomyces cerevisiae 41CM in the Brewery Sector: Use as a Starter for “Ale” and “Lager” Craft Beer Production
Previous Article in Journal
Uncovering Quercetin’s Effects against Influenza A Virus Using Network Pharmacology and Molecular Docking
Previous Article in Special Issue
Mead Production Using Immobilized Cells of Saccharomyces cerevisiae: Reuse of Sodium Alginate Beads
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Processes
Volume 9
Issue 9
10.3390/pr9091628
processes-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Potential for Lager Beer Production from Saccharomyces cerevisiae Strains Isolated from the Vineyard Environment

by
Massimo Iorizzo
1,
Francesco Letizia
1,
Gianluca Albanese
1,
Francesca Coppola
2,
Angelita Gambuti
2,
Bruno Testa
1,*,
Riccardo Aversano
2,
Martino Forino
2 and
Raffaele Coppola
1
1
Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Food Sciences (DiAAA), University of Molise, Via De Sanctis snc, 86100 Campobasso, Italy
2
Department of Agricultural Sciences, Grape and Wine Science Division, University of Naples “Federico II”, Viale Italia, 83100 Avellino, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Processes 2021, 9(9), 1628; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9091628
Submission received: 18 July 2021 / Revised: 6 September 2021 / Accepted: 8 September 2021 / Published: 9 September 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Control and Optimization of Alcoholic Fermentation and Extraction Technology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Saccharomyces pastorianus, genetic hybrids of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and the Saccharomyces eubayanus, is one of the most widely used lager yeasts in the brewing industry. In recent years, new strategies have been adopted and new lines of research have been outlined to create and expand the pool of lager brewing starters. The vineyard microbiome has received significant attention in the past few years due to many opportunities in terms of biotechnological applications in the winemaking processes. However, the characterization of S. cerevisiae strains isolated from winery environments as an approach to selecting starters for beer production has not been fully investigated, and little is currently available. Four wild cryotolerant S. cerevisiae strains isolated from vineyard environments were evaluated as potential starters for lager beer production at laboratory scale using a model beer wort (MBW). In all tests, the industrial lager brewing S. pastorianus Weihenstephan 34/70 was used as a reference strain. The results obtained, although preliminary, showed some good properties of these strains, such as antioxidant activity, flocculation capacity, efficient fermentation at 15 °C and low diacetyl production. Further studies will be carried out using these S. cerevisiae strains as starters for lager beer production on a pilot scale in order to verify the chemical and sensory characteristics of the beers produced.

1. Introduction

Beer is a fermented alcoholic beverage produced from water, malted cereal grains (generally barley and wheat) and hops [1,2]. The yeast metabolism during the fermentation and maturation process is crucial, as the levels of aroma-active compounds in beer depend not only on the raw materials and the fermentation conditions but also on the yeast strain [3,4]. By using specific yeasts, fermentation efficiency can be increased, new beer characteristics can be developed and the sensory complexity of the final product can be enhanced [5]. The yeast species dominating the production of alcoholic beverages worldwide belong to the Saccharomyces genus. The Saccharomyces sensu stricto species complex [6] contains some of the most important species to the food industry, including S. cerevisiae, used for wine, bread, ale beers and sake productions [7]; S. bayanus, involved in the wine and cider productions [8] and S. pastorianus, which is employed in lager beer production [9]. S. pastorianus is an interspecies hybrid of S. cerevisiae and S. eubayanus [10]. S. cerevisiae has been selected for some properties crucial to beer production, such as flocculation capacity and alcohol tolerance, but it requires an optimal fermentation temperature above 15 °C. S. eubayanus is able to ferment at lower temperatures but does not metabolize maltotriose and shows low flocculation capacity [10,11,12].
The natural hybrid S. pastorianus shows tolerance to cold temperatures and the ability to metabolize maltose and maltotriose. These traits were inherited from genetic interactions between the parent genomes [13,14]. In particular, the S. eubayanus genome conferred enhanced cold tolerance, while the S. cerevisiae subgenome assured a vigorous and complete fermentation [15,16,17]. In spite of the multiplicity of different beers, actually, a small number of yeast strains are available to the brewing industry [18]. The selection and domestication of brewer’s yeasts have reduced genotypic and phenotypic variability [19].
In recent years, new strategies have been adopted and new lines of research have been outlined to create and expand the pool of lager brewing starters, including the creation in laboratory of new lager yeast strains generated by interspecific hybridization [10,20,21].
The microbiomes of terrestrial environments constitute vast, under-explored and under-exploited sources of biodiversity. Among these environments, the vineyard microbiome represents an important reserve of yeast strains, with a wide genotypic and phenotypic variability potentially suitable to fermented beverage productions.
However, S. cerevisiae strains—isolated from winery environments as an approach to select new starters for beer production—have not been fully investigated, and little is currently available [22,23]. In the frame of a scientific project (PRIN, ADAPT: influence of agro-climatic conditions on the microbiome and genetic expression of grapevines for the production of red wines: a multidisciplinary approach), some studies have been carried out on the microbial biodiversity in vineyard ecosystems.
Research on the grape yeast communities has led to the selection of four cryotolerant S. cerevisiae strains.
In order to evaluate some technological performances, in this study, we tested the suitability of these yeasts, found in non-brewing environments, as starters for lager beer production.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Yeasts Isolation

The used yeasts were isolated from red grapes, Aglianico and Cabernet Sauvignon varieties, harvested at a fully ripened stage from six vineyards located in three different regions of Southern Italy: Campania, Sicily and Molise. Grape samples were collected randomly from the vineyards and transferred to the laboratory within 12 h. The grapes were crushed by a homogenizer (bagMixer 400, Interscience, Saint Nom la Brétèche, France), and appropriate serial dilutions of each sample were made using a physiological saline solution (0.9% w/v NaCl). Subsequently, 0.1 mL of each dilution was distributed on Petri plates containing WL nutrient agar (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), supplemented with 0.01% w/v chloramphenicol (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). The plates were incubated at 28 °C for 1–3 days. After the incubation, 5 colonies from each sample were picked on the basis of typical Saccharomyces morphology: cream/white in color and smooth non-powdery surface [24,25]. Purification of the strains was performed on the YEPD agar (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) by successive subculturing. Stock cultures were maintained in YEPD broth (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) for daily use and were preserved in YEPD broth with 30% (v/v) sterile glycerol (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany) for long-term storage at −80 °C until further characterization.

2.2. Molecular Identification of Yeasts

A total of 124 hypothetical Saccharomyces strains were analyzed. The isolated strains were aerobically cultured in 80 mL of YEPD broth at 28 °C for 18 h maintained under stirring using a digital orbital shaker (Heathrow Scientific, Illinois, USA) set at 200 rpm.
Each isolate (2 mL) was centrifuged at 7500 rpm for 5 min at 4 °C, and the pellet obtained was subjected to DNA extraction using a DNA extraction kit (Norgen Biotek Corp., Thorold, ON, Canada) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. To improve the cell lysing and the DNA yield, a solution of 20 mg/mL of lyticase (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany) was added, and the mixture was incubated at 37 °C for 45 min.
The quantity and purity of the DNA were assessed using the NanoDrop spectrophotometer 2000 (Thermo Scientific, Wilmington, DE, USA).
Amplification of 28S rDNA region [26,27] was carried out using U1 and U2 primers. PCR was performed using a Mastercycler nexus gradient (Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany).
The reaction mixture consisted of 10 μL TaqMan 2x PCR Master Mix (Norgen Biotek Corp., Thorold, ON, Canada), 2 μL of each primer (2.5 μM), 2 μL template DNA and the nuclease-free water was added to bring the final volume to 20 μL.
PCR products were separated in 1.5% (w/v) agarose gel by electrophoresis for 45 min at 80 V in 1X TAE buffer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) and were subsequently visualized by UV transilluminator (Bio-Rad molecular image Gel Doc XR, Hercules, CA, USA) after ethidium bromide (50 µg/mL, Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany) staining.
After purification (QIA-quick PCR Purification kit, QIAGEN GmbH, Hilden, Germany), the DNA products were sent to a commercial facility for sequencing (Eurofins MWG Biotech Company, Ebersberg, Germany). The Basic Local Alignment Search Tool Nucleotide (BLASTN) tool encoded in NCBI suite [28] was applied to the GenBank [29] database to identify the sequences. Sequence matches that showed high identity scores (98% and above) were considered acceptable for taxonomic placement at species level. Identification of S. cerevisiae species was validated via PCR using the ScHO-F/ScHO-R specific primers (Table 1) that amplify the HO/chromosome IV gene [30].

2.3. Screening of S. cerevisiae Strains

2.3.1. Cryotolerance

The capacity to grow at 4 °C of all the 124 yeast isolates was evaluated by inoculating (106 cfu/mL) the yeast cultures into Erlenmeyer flasks (working volume of 100 mL) containing 80 mL of YEPD broth and maintained under stirring using a digital orbital shaker (Heathrow Scientific, IL, USA) set at 150 rpm. The growth was determined visually after 24 h.
The fermentation capacity at 15 °C was evaluated in a model beer wort (MBW) composed of: malt extract 70 g/L, glucose 30 g/L, peptone 1.5 g/L, K2HPO4 1.14 g/L, MgSO4.7H2O 1.23 g/L, CaCl2.2H2O 0.44 g/L, thiamine HCl 0.5 mg/L, ZnCl2 135 μg/L; pH was adjusted to 5.5 with HCl. The MBW was sterilized before use by 3 pasteurization cycles of 5 min each at 80 °C. As for the inoculum, the yeast strains were cultured aerobically into Erlenmeyer flasks (working volume of 100 mL) containing 80 mL of YEPD broth, incubated at 20 °C for 24 h maintained under stirring using a digital orbital shaker (Heathrow Scientific, IL, USA) set at 150 rpm. After the incubation time, the broth cultures were centrifuged (5000 rpm for 10 min at 4 °C), the pellet obtained was washed with sterile physiological solution (0.9% w/v NaCl), and Erlenmeyer flasks (working volume of 250 mL) containing 150 mL of MBW were inoculated with 106 cfu/mL and incubated at 15 °C without shaking. The progress of the fermentation was monitored by the daily weight loss through CO2 release.
All the chemical compounds used were purchased from Merck (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany).

2.3.2. Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) Production

H2S production of all the 124 yeast isolates was evaluated on BIGGY agar (Bismuth Sulphite Glucose Glycine Yeast; Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). The yeast strains were aerobically cultured in YEPD broth at 28 °C. Successively, each yeast strain was spread on the surface of BIGGY agar medium, and plates were incubated at 15 °C for 5 days. On this medium, H2S-negative strains showed white colonies, while H2S-producing colonies were characterized by a brown or dark brown color. For results, the following chromatic scale was considered: 0 (white colonies, no hydrogen sulfide production), 1 (cream colonies), 2 (light brown colonies), 3 (brown colonies), 4 (dark brown or black colonies, very intensive hydrogen sulfide production) [31]. The test was performed in triplicate.

2.4. Technological Characterization

Four selected S. cerevisiae strains (CS1C; CS2C; CSB21B; 41CM) were subjected to technological characterization trials. In all the tests, the industrial lager brewing S. pastorianus Weihenstephan 34/70 (Fachhochschule Weihenstephan, Freising, Germany) was used as reference strain [32].

2.4.1. Yeast Culture Preparation

The yeast strains were cultured aerobically in 100 mL of YEPD broth into Erlenmeyer flasks (working volume of 250 mL) at 18 °C for 24 h maintained under stirring using a digital orbital shaker (Heathrow Scientific, IL, USA) set at 150 rpm. After incubation, the broth cultures (BC) were centrifuged (5000 rpm for 10 min at 4 °C) to obtain the cell pellet (CP).

2.4.2. Flocculation Assay

Flocculation was estimated according to Soares [33], with some modification. The CP was deflocculated in 250 mM EDTA solution, washed with 250 mM NaCl solution and suspended in the same solution to a final concentration of about 108 cells/mL. The OD600 of this suspension (ODd) was measured using a basic BioSpectrometer (Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany).
Flocculation was then induced by adding CaCl2 (4 mM final concentration) to 5 mL of the cell suspension in a 10 mL test tube. The tube was shaken at oscillation rate of 50/min for 5 min and then left standing vertically.
After 10 and 30 min at 15 °C, 1 mL of suspension was removed just below the meniscus and mixed with 1 mL of 250 mM EDTA (pH 8.0). Finally, the OD600 of this suspension (ODf) was measured using a basic BioSpectrometer (Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany).
Flocculation (%) was calculated using the following formula:
100 (ODd − ODf)/ODd
(ODd: optical density of deflocculated cell suspension. ODf: optical density after the flocculation phase). The test was performed in triplicate.
All the chemical compounds used were purchased from Merck (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany).

2.5. Fermentation Trials

The CP of each yeast strain was washed with physiological solution (0.9% w/v NaCl), and the inoculum was made at a concentration of 106 cfu/mL in 200 mL of MBW using Erlenmeyer flasks (working volume of 250 mL) plugged with a special glass device (Müller valve) containing pure sulfuric acid. The fermentations were performed at 15 °C and their progress was monitored daily by measuring the mass loss due to CO2 release until a constant weight was recorded for 3 consecutive days [34]. Sugar concentrations (maltose and glucose), pH and the alcohol content evolution were monitored during the fermentation. Maltose and glucose were determined using a colorimetric kit (Merck KGaA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. pH was measured using a pHmeter (Crison basic 20, Barcelona, Spain). Alcohol was determined according to the method of AOAC (Association of Official Analytical Chemists) [35].
At the end of the fermentation process (14 days), the fermented products were centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 15 min, decarbonized through agitation and subjected to chemical analysis. The fermentations were carried out in triplicate.

2.5.1. Chemical Analysis

pH of each sample was measured using a pHmeter (Crison basic 20, Barcelona, Spain). The determination of the alcohol content of fermented products was carried out using a distillation procedure and measurement of specific gravity of the distillate based on the standards of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists [35]. Glycerol, acetaldehyde, succinic acid, acetic acid, citric acid, total SO2, L-malic acid and D-lactic acid were determined using enzymatic kits (Steroglass, Perugia, Italy) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Diacetyl (2,3-butanedione) was spectrophotometrically determined according to the method of Alvarez et al. [36] using a BioSpectrometer basic (Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany). All the analyses were carried out in triplicate.

2.5.2. Antioxidant activity (TEAC)

For the antioxidant activity (AA), the CP obtained from 5 mL of BC was washed with physiological solution (0.9% w/v NaCl) and was suspended in 500 μL of methanol, and after 12 h of storage at −20 °C, the suspension was centrifuged (10,000 rpm for 15 min at 4 °C) to obtain the cell extract (CE).
The AA was evaluated using the ABTS (2,2 azino-bis 3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) method according to Iorizzo et al. [37] and by DPPH (2,2-diphenyl-1-picryl-hydrazyl-hydrate) assay according to Molyneux [38].
For total cell protein extraction, 5 mL of the CP matrices was suspended in 1 mL of NaOH (0.1 M) sonicated (100 W, 25 kHz frequency, 30 min, duty cycle 50%, 25 °C) according to Liu et al. [39] using an ultrasonic homogenizer (Labsonic M, Sartorius; Varedo, Italy) and incubated at 95 °C for 20 min; the supernatant was centrifuged at 13,000 rpm for 5 min and was used to estimate the amount of total protein.
The suspension was used for protein measurement according to Di Martino et al. [40] using a BioSpectrometer (Eppendorf; Milan, Italy), and the cell protein concentration (μg/mL) was calculated by means of a calibration curve where bovine serum albumin (BSA) was used as a standard. The data of antioxidant activity were expressed as ratio µg Trolox equivalents/mg cell protein (BSA equivalents). All the chemical reagents used in the experiments were purchased from Merck (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany).

2.6. Statistical Analysis

All experiments were carried out in triplicates. The results were expressed as the mean ± SD. Microbial count levels and chemical parameters were analyzed by ANOVA (IBM SPSS Statistics 21).

3. Results

3.1. Molecular Identification

Based on the analysis of 28S rDNA using the primers U1 and U2, all the 124 yeast isolates turned out to belong to the S. cerevisiae species. The taxonomic placement at a species level was assigned to rDNA gene sequences with closest BLASTn matches to organisms located in GenBank [29] at 98% aligned similarity or greater. Based on the chromogenic test on BIGGY agar and the cryotolerance test (ability to grow at 4 °C and a greater capacity to ferment at 15 °C), CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C and 41CM S. cerevisiae strains were selected for further technological characterization. Genetic analysis of the HO/chromosome IV gene using the specific primers ScHO-F and ScHO-R allowed us to confirm that the four selected strains belonged to S. cerevisiae species (data not shown).

3.2. Technological and Physiological Properties

3.2.1. Flocculation Ability

The results of the flocculation capacity (%) of the four selected S. cerevisiae strains and S. pastorianus W-34/70 are shown graphically in Figure 1 and numerically in Table S1 (Supplementary Materials). After 10 min, the flocculation values ranged from 3.0% (CS1C) to 24.0% (CSB21B) with high variability among the various yeasts; instead, after 30 min, there were minor variabilities, except for the 41CM strain, which showed lower flocculation (30.3%) compared to the other strains with a flocculation capacity above 50%.

3.2.2. Antioxidant Activity

The results of the antioxidant activity are shown in Table 2. In the ABTS test, Trolox values were higher than those obtained by the DPPH method, highlighting a greater capacity of the ABTS method to detect the specific antioxidant substances present in the cell extract of yeasts.
Data obtained using the ABTS method showed significant differences, with values between 4.56 (41CM) and 6.48 (W-34/70) μg Trolox Eq./mg cell protein.
Instead, data obtained by the DPPH method showed no meaningful differences, with values comprised between 0.85 (CS2C) and 0.98 (CSB21B) μg Trolox Eq./mg BSA Eq.

3.2.3. Fermentation Kinetics and Chemical Composition of Fermented Products

All the S. cerevisiae strains featured fermentation kinetics and final amounts of ethyl alcohol similar to the S. pastorianus W-34/70 reference strain. In Table S2, the values of the ethanol produced during alcoholic fermentation are reported. In all tests, the fermentation activity of the starter yeasts ended after 14 days.
The fermentation kinetics of glucose and maltose (Figure 2) were also similar among the different starters used, with differences almost always statistically insignificant. All the numerical data are shown in Tables S3 and S4.
The results of chemical characteristics of fermented products are shown in Table 3. pH values during alcoholic fermentation were similar in the different tests. In Table S5, the pH values during alcoholic fermentation are reported. Instead, meaningful differences often occurred in regard to the amounts of every single organic acid present in the different fermented products.
In particular, in the case of acetic acid (range 7.7–13.0 mg/L), there were non-significant differences in the products obtained using the 41CM, CS2C and S. pastorianus W-34/70 starters.
As for the acetaldehyde production, the values ranged from 6.2 mg/L (41CM) to 16.5 mg/L (CSB21B), with non-meaningful differences between the 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70 strains. The glycerol concentrations in the fermented products ranged from 1.7 to 2.4 g/L; data showed a low variability among the selected yeast strains in terms of ability to produce such compounds. Moreover, in regard to the production of diacetyl, there were significant differences between the four selected yeasts and the reference strain, with values between 201.3 μg/L (CSB21B) and 466.3 μg/L (CS2C).

4. Discussion

In our study, preliminary screening for the selection of yeasts was based on the assessment of hydrogen sulfide production and on the fermentative ability at 15 °C, which falls within the fermentation temperatures of lager beers [41,42].
H2S is a metabolite containing a sulfide group; it has a low sensory threshold (50–80 μg/L) and can be produced by yeasts in different amounts during fermentation, thus contributing to off-flavors [43]. In our study, the capacity to produce H2S was assessed by growing yeast cells on Biggy agar [44]. S. cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C and 41CM strains did not produce detectable quantities of H2S by this semi-quantitative technique; therefore, they were considered non-producers or low producers of H2S.
In the field of lager beer production, it is important that yeasts exert their metabolic activities at low temperatures [13,45].
Our results highlighted the ability of the four S. cerevisiae strains to ferment at 15 °C, similarly to the reference strain of S. pastorianus W-34/70.
Flocculation ability describes the aggregation capacity of yeast cells [46], and the number of yeast cells suspended during fermentation affects the wort fermentation velocity, beer flavor, maturation, cell crop formation and filtration [47]. The four selected S. cerevisiae strains showed meaningful differences in terms of flocculation capacity. Several studies have shown that this property is highly strain-dependent and is affected by genetic, physiological and environmental factors [48,49,50,51]. The flocculation phase is a positive event when it occurs at the end of the fermentation process. However, when yeasts tend to aggregate and precipitate too early, there may be a slowdown or a blockage of alcoholic fermentation. In these cases, the obtained beers contain excessive residual sugars and unsatisfactory flavor characteristics.
Oxidation reactions, which already occur during the early stages of brewing and in post-fermentation, can have a negative impact on the color and flavor stability and cause the formation of off-flavor compounds, thus reducing the shelf life of beers [52,53]. During the fermentation, yeast cells will upregulate antioxidant-related genes to mitigate the deleterious effects of reactive oxygen species (ROS) [54]. Oxidative stress typically leads to the formation of radical oxygen, which damages biological macromolecules [55]. To prevent oxidative damages, the yeast cell activates an oxidative stress response, consisting of both enzymatic (peroxidases, catalases and superoxide dismutases) and non-enzymatic antioxidant systems [56].
Yeasts synthesize several bioactive antioxidant compounds such as torulahoidin, citric acid, coenzyme Q, glutathione, thioredoxin, various forms of tocopherols, riboflavin (vitamin B2), yeast-derived cell wall β-glucans, cytochrome C, etc. that may contrast oxidative phenomena during beer maturation [57,58,59,60,61,62,63].
Industrial beers after alcoholic fermentation are filtered and pasteurized to remove the yeast and stabilize the beer prior to packaging. However, craft beers are not filtered and pasteurized. In these products, the presence of antioxidant substances, secreted by the cell or released after its death, helps the beer preservation by delaying oxidative degeneration [57,64,65]. Our study showed promising results in terms of the ability of the selected yeasts to act as natural antioxidants.
Sulfites in beer are not only important antioxidants to prevent beer from oxidative staling, but they can also act as important mask agents for stale flavor by reacting with carbonyl staling compounds to form bisulfite–carbonyl adducts, which are important for beer flavor stability [65,66]. The production of sulfites in beer is affected by yeast strains, fermentation conditions, wort components and sulfites production, which appeared to be yeast-strain-dependent [67]. In fact, our results showed high variability in the SO2 production.
Diacetyl as a by-product of fermentation is more characteristic of ales than lagers. Diacetyl production and its oxidation state are correlated to fermentation temperatures. Diacetyl is produced in the initial fermentation steps and can be reabsorbed by the yeast and reduced to flavorless compounds. Yeast strains show a distinct difference in their diacetyl reduction ability. In lager beers, which are characterized by fresh and clean flavor profiles, diacetyl is considered almost invariable as an off-flavor at concentrations above the flavor threshold of about 0.1–0.15 mg/L. Diacetyl is synthesized by oxidative decarboxylation of excess α-acetolactate derived by the valine biosynthetic pathway. [68]. Our results showed a high variability regarding the diacetyl production; in particular, S. cerevisiae CS1C, CS2C and 41CM strains produced significantly lower amounts of this compound compared to the S. pastorianus W-34/70 reference strain.
Yeasts produce acetaldehyde as an alcoholic fermentation intermediate compound with a threshold perception of about 20 mg/L [69], and its presence in beer above the threshold value is associated with green apple, emulsion paint, wine (white wine) and sherry flavor notes at low levels; but at higher concentrations, it can contribute to an off-flavor reminiscent of rotten apples.
Acetaldehyde is also produced by the oxidation of ethanol (alcohol) or even released by yeasts during beer maturation due to the autolysis process [70]. Our study showed that all the selected yeasts produced quantities of this compound below 20 mg/L.
Glycerol has favorable impacts on the quality of beer, as it is linked to density and viscosity, which are classified as mouth-feel attributes. The favorable threshold is 10 g/L in beers [71]. In our fermentation trials, the four selected S. cerevisiae and S. pastorianus W-34/70 strains produced similar amounts of glycerol.
The sensory effects of beers are determined by the aroma, taste, temperature and texture. As for organic acids, the balance between the sourness and sweetness of a beverage is of high importance. Predominant organic acids in beer are acetic, pyruvic, lactic, malic and citric acid, mainly derived from vegetable raw materials and the tricarboxylic acid cycle metabolism of yeast. The results of our study showed that the measured pH values were similar, but there was high variability in the quantities of each organic acid synthesized by the selected starter yeast.
Acetic acid causes a quality reduction when its content is higher than the taste threshold. The concentration of acetic acid ranges between 57 and 145 mg/L, and its threshold range is from 71 to 200 mg/L in different kinds of beer [69]. The production of acetic acid during alcoholic fermentation depends on the yeast strain, wort composition and fermentation conditions [72,73]. In our tests, by using the MBW as fermentation substrate, all the yeast starters produced amounts of acetic acid below 12 mg/L.
Organic acids are among the most important compounds in beer: they not only have an effect on the sour taste of beer, but some of them can also have other flavor attributes, such as a bitter or salty taste [74]. Moreover, they affect the beer pH [75], quality and flavor stability [76,77].
Citric acid is an organic acid found in beer normally within a concentration range of 50–250 mg/L; it is produced by the yeast oxidative metabolism. Although it contributes to the overall acidity of the beer, citric acid has little impact on the overall flavor. It is sometimes added to increase the acidity of some low-alcohol and non-alcoholic beers where incomplete fermentation fails to increase acidity to an appropriate level [78,79]. Succinate has long been known to be excreted by yeasts during fermentation, and the flavor threshold is 200 mg/L [69]. Two S. cerevisiae strains (41CM, CS2C) and the reference strain W-34/70 have produced this acid at concentrations above its threshold value.
S. cerevisiae has the ability to degrade or form malic acid during fermentation [80,81]. Malic acid is converted by the malic enzyme into pyruvic acid [82,83]. In beers, the flavor threshold of malic acid is 200 mg/L [69].
S. cerevisiae strains produce a low amount of D-lactic acid during alcoholic fermentation [84]. Levels up to 100 mg/L have been associated with a low enzymatic activity of pyruvate decarboxylase [85]. Lactic acid in beer has a flavor threshold of 400 mg/L [69]. All the yeasts used in our study produced amounts of malic and lactic acids well below their threshold levels.

5. Conclusions

Wider availability of new yeasts and a better understanding of their physiology can have a significant and direct impact on the brewing industry, providing a valuable opportunity for brewers to characterize and diversify their products, especially in craft beer production.
S. cerevisiae is a ubiquitous species in nature, but its origin and biogeography distribution has not been clarified yet [86,87,88,89]. Vineyard and grape berry surfaces provide a physical environment in which complex microbial communities can establish themselves. The enormous variability of these ecosystems can be a bio-reserve of yeasts with functional characteristics applicable in the field of fermented beverages. Production of lager-type beers requires a set of essential phenotypes, including the ability to flocculate and ferment at low temperatures. The fermentation dynamics and chemical parameters examined showed an overall good potential of S. cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C and 41CM strains as a starter for lager beer production.
The relationship between adaptation and natural selection of yeasts in the brewing environment is far from being fully clarified.
Previous studies have shown that the “hybrid species” S. pastorianus has inherited, above all, the characteristics of alcohol tolerance and fermentative vigor from the parent S. cerevisiae.
Our results showed that some specific strains of S. cerevisiae also possess good cryotolerance and develop fermentative dynamics similar to the reference strain S. pastorianus W-34/70 in a model system (MBW) at 15 °C.
The good potential of these yeasts does not axiomatically mean that they are suitable to be used in brewing.
Additional studies are needed to further validate these findings. These selected yeasts will be employed on a pilot scale in the production of lager beers at temperatures below 15 degrees to evaluate some fermentation dynamics in natural beer wort with the addition of hops and verify their influence on the chemical and sensory characteristics of the beers produced, especially with reference to volatile compounds (higher alcohols, terpenes, esters).

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/pr9091628/s1, Table S1: Flocculation capacity (%) of S. cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C and 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70 strains after 10 min and 30 min at 15 °C. Table S2: Alcohol production during fermentation in MBW by S. cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C, 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70. Table S3: Maltose values during fermentation in MBW inoculated with S. cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C, 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70. Table S4: Glucose values during fermentation in MBW inoculated with S. cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C, 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70. Table S5: pH values during alcoholic fermentation in MBW inoculated with S. cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C, 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.I. and B.T.; methodology, B.T., F.L. and F.C.; software, F.L.; validation, A.G. and M.F.; formal analysis, B.T. and F.L.; investigation, M.I. and R.A.; resources, R.C.; data curation, G.A.; writing—original draft preparation, M.I. and B.T.; writing—review and editing, M.I., M.F., B.T. and F.L.; supervision, R.C.; funding acquisition, R.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was carried out in the context of the scientific project ADAPT: influence of agro-climatic condition conditions on the microbiome and genetic expression of grapevines for the production of red wines: a multidisciplinary approach. PRIN: Research Projects of National Interest; funded by the Italian Ministry for Universities and Research (MIUR), grant number 2017M83XFJ-(CUP H34I19000590001).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Maia, P.D.D.S.; Baião, D.d.S.; da Silva, V.P.F.; Lemos Miguel, M.A.; Quirino Lacerda, E.C.; Calado, V.M.d.A.; Carneiro, C.d.S.; Finotelli, P.V.; Pierucci, A.P.T.R. Microencapsulation of a Craft Beer, Nutritional Composition, Antioxidant Stability, and Drink Acceptance. LWT 2020, 133, 110104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Parker, D.K. Chapter 6—Beer: Production, sensory characteristics and sensory analysis. In Alcoholic Beverages; Piggott, J., Ed.; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2012; pp. 133–158. ISBN 978-0-85709-051-5. [Google Scholar]
  3. Pires, E.J.; Teixeira, J.A.; Brányik, T.; Vicente, A.A. Yeast: The Soul of Beer’s Aroma—A Review of Flavour-Active Esters and Higher Alcohols Produced by the Brewing Yeast. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2014, 98, 1937–1949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Meier-Dörnberg, T.; Hutzler, M.; Michel, M.; Methner, F.-J.; Jacob, F. The Importance of a Comparative Characterization of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Saccharomyces pastorianus Strains for Brewing. Fermentation 2017, 3, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bokulich, N.A.; Bamforth, C.W. The Microbiology of Malting and Brewing. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. MMBR 2013, 77, 157–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  6. Vaughan-Martini, A.; Martini, A. Chapter 61—Saccharomyces meyen ex Reess (1870). In The Yeasts, 5th ed.; Kurtzman, C.P., Fell, J.W., Boekhout, T., Eds.; Elsevier: London, UK, 2011; pp. 733–746. ISBN 978-0-444-52149-1. [Google Scholar]
  7. Sicard, D.; Legras, J.-L. Bread, Beer and Wine: Yeast Domestication in the Saccharomyces Sensu Stricto Complex. Trail Domest. Migr. Invasions Agric. 2011, 334, 229–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Magalhães, F.; Krogerus, K.; Vidgren, V.; Sandell, M.; Gibson, B. Improved Cider Fermentation Performance and Quality with Newly Generated Saccharomyces cerevisiae × Saccharomyces eubayanus Hybrids. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2017, 44, 1203–1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Rainieri, S.; Kodama, Y.; Kaneko, Y.; Mikata, K.; Nakao, Y.; Ashikari, T. Pure and Mixed Genetic Lines of Saccharomyces bayanus and Saccharomyces pastorianus and Their Contribution to the Lager Brewing Strain Genome. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2006, 72, 3968–3974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Krogerus, K.; Magalhães, F.; Vidgren, V.; Gibson, B. New Lager Yeast Strains Generated by Interspecific Hybridization. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2015, 42, 769–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Gibson, B.R.; Storgårds, E.; Krogerus, K.; Vidgren, V. Comparative Physiology and Fermentation Performance of Saaz and Frohberg Lager Yeast Strains and the Parental Species Saccharomyces eubayanus. Yeast 2013, 30, 255–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Van Mulders, S.E.; Ghequire, M.; Daenen, L.; Verbelen, P.J.; Verstrepen, K.J.; Delvaux, F.R. Flocculation Gene Variability in Industrial Brewer’s Yeast Strains. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2010, 88, 1321–1331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Gibson, B.; Liti, G. Saccharomyces pastorianus: Genomic Insights Inspiring Innovation for Industry. Yeast 2015, 32, 17–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Sato, M.; Kishimoto, M.; Watari, J.; Takashio, M. Breeding of Brewer’s Yeast by Hybridization between a Top-Fermenting Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae and a Cryophilic Yeast Saccharomyces bayanus. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2002, 93, 509–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Dunn, B.; Sherlock, G. Reconstruction of the Genome Origins and Evolution of the Hybrid Lager Yeast Saccharomyces pastorianus. Genome Res. 2008, 18, 1610–1623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Baker, E.; Wang, B.; Bellora, N.; Peris, D.; Hulfachor, A.B.; Koshalek, J.A.; Adams, M.; Libkind, D.; Hittinger, C.T. The Genome Sequence of Saccharomyces eubayanus and the Domestication of Lager-Brewing Yeasts. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2015, 32, 2818–2831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Gallone, B.; Mertens, S.; Gordon, J.L.; Maere, S.; Verstrepen, K.J.; Steensels, J. Origins, Evolution, Domestication and Diversity of Saccharomyces Beer Yeasts. Food Biotechnol. Plant Biotechnol. 2018, 49, 148–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Lengeler, K.B.; Stovicek, V.; Fennessy, R.T.; Katz, M.; Förster, J. Never Change a Brewing Yeast? Why Not, There Are Plenty to Choose From. Front. Genet. 2020, 11, 582789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Steensels, J.; Gallone, B.; Voordeckers, K.; Verstrepen, K.J. Domestication of Industrial Microbes. Curr. Biol. 2019, 29, R381–R393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Gorter de Vries, A.R.; Voskamp, M.A.; van Aalst, A.C.A.; Kristensen, L.H.; Jansen, L.; van den Broek, M.; Salazar, A.N.; Brouwers, N.; Abeel, T.; Pronk, J.T.; et al. Laboratory Evolution of a Saccharomyces cerevisiae × S. eubayanus Hybrid Under Simulated Lager-Brewing Conditions. Front. Genet. 2019, 10, 242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Turgeon, Z.; Sierocinski, T.; Brimacombe, C.A.; Jin, Y.; Goldhawke, B.; Swanson, J.M.; Husnik, J.I.; Dahabieh, M.S.; Druzhinina, I.S. Industrially Applicable De Novo Lager Yeast Hybrids with a Unique Genomic Architecture: Creation and Characterization. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2021, 87, e02434-20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Canonico, L.; Comitini, F.; Ciani, M. Dominance and Influence of Selected Saccharomyces cerevisiae Strains on the Analytical Profile of Craft Beer Refermentation. J. Inst. Brew. 2014, 120, 262–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Rossi, S.; Turchetti, B.; Sileoni, V.; Marconi, O.; Perretti, G. Evaluation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Strains Isolated from Non-Brewing Environments in Beer Production. J. Inst. Brew. 2018, 124, 381–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Pallmann, C.L.; Brown, J.A.; Olineka, T.L.; Cocolin, L.; Mills, D.A.; Bisson, L.F. Use of WL Medium to Profile Native Flora Fermentations. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 2001, 52, 198–203. [Google Scholar]
  25. Lombardi, S.J.; Pannella, G.; Iorizzo, M.; Moreno-Arribas, M.V.; Tremonte, P.; Succi, M.; Sorrentino, E.; Macciola, V.; Di Renzo, M.; Coppola, R. Sequential Inoculum of Hanseniaspora guilliermondii and Saccharomyces cerevisiae for Winemaking Campanino on an Industrial Scale. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2018, 34, 161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Meroth, C.B.; Hammes, W.P.; Hertel, C. Identification and Population Dynamics of Yeasts in Sourdough Fermentation Processes by PCR-Denaturing Gradient Gel Electrophoresis. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2003, 69, 7453–7461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. OIV—International Organisation of Vine and Wine. Molecular Tools for Identification of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Wine Yeast and Other Yeast Species Related to Winemaking. Resolut. OIV-OENO 2011, 408, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  28. NCBI Resource Coordinators Database Resources of the National Center for Biotechnology Information. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018, 46, D8–D13. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  29. Benson, D.A.; Cavanaugh, M.; Clark, K.; Karsch-Mizrachi, I.; Lipman, D.J.; Ostell, J.; Sayers, E.W. GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013, 41, D36–D42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  30. De Melo Pereira, G.V.; Ramos, C.L.; Galvão, C.; Souza Dias, E.; Schwan, R.F. Use of Specific PCR Primers to Identify Three Important Industrial Species of Saccharomyces Genus: Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Saccharomyces bayanus and Saccharomyces pastorianus. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2010, 51, 131–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Comitini, F.; Gobbi, M.; Domizio, P.; Romani, C.; Lencioni, L.; Mannazzu, I.; Ciani, M. Selected Non-Saccharomyces Wine Yeasts in Controlled Multistarter Fermentations with Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Food Microbiol. 2011, 28, 873–882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Nakao, Y.; Kanamori, T.; Itoh, T.; Kodama, Y.; Rainieri, S.; Nakamura, N.; Shimonaga, T.; Hattori, M.; Ashikari, T. Genome Sequence of the Lager Brewing Yeast, an Interspecies Hybrid. DNA Res. Int. J. Rapid Publ. Rep. Genes Genomes 2009, 16, 115–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Soares, E.V.; Mota, M. Quantification of Yeast Flocculation. J. Inst. Brew. 1997, 103, 93–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Capece, A.; Romaniello, R.; Pietrafesa, A.; Siesto, G.; Pietrafesa, R.; Zambuto, M.; Romano, P. Use of Saccharomyces cerevisiae var. boulardii in Co-Fermentations with S. cerevisiae for the Production of Craft Beers with Potential Healthy Value-Added. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2018, 284, 22–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Delwiche, S. Official Method 920.86. Off. Methods Anal. AOAC Int. 2003, 5, 20001310621. [Google Scholar]
  36. Alvarez, R.; Haya, E.F.; Delgado, M.A.; Ferrete, F.J. Vicinal Diketones in Beer. Part I: A Modified EBC Method for the Determination of Diacetyl and Other Vicinal Diketones in Beer. J. Inst. Brew. 1989, 95, 21–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Iorizzo, M.; Testa, B.; Ganassi, S.; Lombardi, S.J.; Ianiro, M.; Letizia, F.; Succi, M.; Tremonte, P.; Vergalito, F.; Cozzolino, A.; et al. Probiotic Properties and Potentiality of Lactiplantibacillus Plantarum Strains for the Biological Control of Chalkbrood Disease. J. Fungi 2021, 7, 379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Molyneux, P. The Use of the Stable Free Radical Diphenylpicrylhydrazyl (DPPH) for Estimating Antioxidant Activity. J. Sci. Technol. 2004, 26, 211–219. [Google Scholar]
  39. Liu, D.; Zeng, X.-A.; Sun, D.-W.; Han, Z. Disruption and Protein Release by Ultrasonication of Yeast Cells. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2013, 18, 132–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Di Martino, C.; Testa, B.; Letizia, F.; Iorizzo, M.; Lombardi, S.J.; Ianiro, M.; Di Renzo, M.; Strollo, D.; Coppola, R. Effect of Exogenous Proline on the Ethanolic Tolerance and Malolactic Performance of Oenococcus Oeni. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 57, 3973–3979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ekberg, J.; Rautio, J.; Mattinen, L.; Vidgren, V.; Londesborough, J.; Gibson, B.R. Adaptive Evolution of the Lager Brewing Yeast Saccharomyces pastorianus for Improved Growth under Hyperosmotic Conditions and Its Influence on Fermentation Performance. FEMS Yeast Res. 2013, 13, 335–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Hutzler, M.; Michel, M.; Kunz, O.; Kuusisto, T.; Magalhães, F.; Krogerus, K.; Gibson, B. Unique Brewing-Relevant Properties of a Strain of Saccharomyces jurei Isolated from Ash (Fraxinus excelsior). Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 645271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Oka, K.; Hayashi, T.; Matsumoto, N.; Yanase, H. Decrease in Hydrogen Sulfide Content during the Final Stage of Beer Fermentation Due to Involvement of Yeast and Not Carbon Dioxide Gas Purging. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2008, 106, 253–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Mendes-Ferreira, A.; Mendes-Faia, A.; Leao, C. Survey of Hydrogen Sulphide Production by Wine Yeasts. J. Food Prot. 2002, 65, 1033–1037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Krogerus, K.; Magalhães, F.; Vidgren, V.; Gibson, B. Novel Brewing Yeast Hybrids: Creation and Application. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2017, 101, 65–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Willaert, R.G. Adhesins of Yeasts: Protein Structure and Interactions. J. Fungi Basel Switz. 2018, 4, 119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Vidgren, V.; Londesborough, J. 125th Anniversary Review: Yeast Flocculation and Sedimentation in Brewing. J. Inst. Brew. 2011, 117, 475–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Soares, E.V. Flocculation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: A Review. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2011, 110, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Stewart, G.G. Yeast Flocculation—Sedimentation and Flotation. Fermentation 2018, 4, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Jin, Y.-L.; Speers, R.A. Effect of Environmental Conditions on the Flocculation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J. Am. Soc. Brew. Chem. 2000, 58, 108–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Verstrepen, K.J.; Derdelinckx, G.; Verachtert, H.; Delvaux, F.R. Yeast Flocculation: What Brewers Should Know. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2003, 61, 197–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Bamforth, C.W.; Lentini, A. Chapter 3—The flavor instability of beer. In Beer; Bamforth, C.W., Ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2009; pp. 85–109. ISBN 978-0-12-669201-3. [Google Scholar]
  53. Vanderhaegen, B.; Neven, H.; Verachtert, H.; Derdelinckx, G. The Chemistry of Beer Aging—A Critical Review. Food Chem. 2006, 95, 357–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Higgins, V.J.; Beckhouse, A.G.; Oliver, A.D.; Rogers, P.J.; Dawes, I.W. Yeast Genome-Wide Expression Analysis Identifies a Strong Ergosterol and Oxidative Stress Response during the Initial Stages of an Industrial Lager Fermentation. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2003, 69, 4777–4787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Gibson, B.R.; Lawrence, S.J.; Boulton, C.A.; Box, W.G.; Graham, N.S.; Linforth, R.S.T.; Smart, K.A. The Oxidative Stress Response of a Lager Brewing Yeast Strain during Industrial Propagation and Fermentation. FEMS Yeast Res. 2008, 8, 574–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  56. Berner, T.S.; Arneborg, N. The Role of Lager Beer Yeast in Oxidative Stability of Model Beer. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2012, 54, 225–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Wang, J.; Fu, X.; Li, M.; Zheng, F.; Niu, C.; Liu, C.; Li, Q. Metabolic Energy Variation of Yeast Affects Its Antioxidant Properties in Beer Brewing. Syst. Microbiol. Biomanufacturing 2021, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  58. Xu, X.; Song, Y.; Guo, L.; Cheng, W.; Niu, C.; Wang, J.; Liu, C.; Zheng, F.; Zhou, Y.; Li, X. Higher NADH Availability of Lager Yeast Increases the Flavor Stability of Beer. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2019, 68, 584–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Wu, M.J.; Clarke, F.M.; Rogers, P.J.; Young, P.; Sales, N.; O’Doherty, P.J.; Higgins, V.J. Identification of a Protein with Antioxidant Activity That Is Important for the Protection against Beer Ageing. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2011, 12, 6089–6103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  60. Wang, Z.; Bai, X.; He, X.; Zhang, B. Secretion Expression of SOD1 and Its Overlapping Function with GSH in Brewing Yeast Strain for Better Flavor and Anti-Aging Ability. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2014, 41, 1415–1424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Pristov, J.B.; Mitrović, A.; Spasojević, I. A Comparative Study of Antioxidative Activities of Cell-Wall Polysaccharides. Carbohydr. Res. 2011, 346, 2255–2259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Kogan, G.; Pajtinka, M.; Babincova, M.; Miadokova, E.; Rauko, P.; Slamenova, D.; Korolenko, T. Yeast Cell Wall Polysaccharides as Antioxidants and Antimutagens: Can They Fight Cancer? Neoplasma 2008, 55, 387–393. [Google Scholar]
  63. Elias, R.J.; Kellerby, S.S.; Decker, E.A. Antioxidant Activity of Proteins and Peptides. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2008, 48, 430–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Saison, D.; De Schutter, D.P.; Delvaux, F.; Delvaux, F.R. Improved Flavor Stability by Aging Beer in the Presence of Yeast. J. Am. Soc. Brew. Chem. 2011, 69, 50–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Zhao, H. Chapter 2—Endogenous Antioxidants and Antioxidant Activities of Beers. In Processing and Impact on Antioxidants in Beverages; Preedy, V., Ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2014; pp. 15–24. ISBN 978-0-12-404738-9. [Google Scholar]
  66. Bushnell, S.E.; Guinard, J.-X.; Bamforth, C.W. Effects of Sulfur Dioxide and Polyvinylpolypyrrolidone on the Flavor Stability of Beer as Measured by Sensory and Chemical Analysis. J. Am. Soc. Brew. Chem. 2003, 61, 133–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Saison, D.; De Schutter, D.P.; Uyttenhove, B.; Delvaux, F.; Delvaux, F.R. Contribution of Staling Compounds to the Aged Flavour of Lager Beer by Studying Their Flavour Thresholds. Food Chem. 2009, 114, 1206–1215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Gibson, B.; Vidgren, V.; Peddinti, G.; Krogerus, K. Diacetyl Control during Brewery Fermentation via Adaptive Laboratory Engineering of the Lager Yeast Saccharomyces pastorianus. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2018, 45, 1103–1112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  69. Engan, S. Organoleptic Threshold Values of Some Organic Acids in Beer. J. Inst. Brew. 1974, 80, 162–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Olaniran, A.O.; Hiralal, L.; Mokoena, M.P.; Pillay, B. Flavour-Active Volatile Compounds in Beer: Production, Regulation and Control. J. Inst. Brew. 2017, 123, 13–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Zhao, X.; Procopio, S.; Becker, T. Flavor Impacts of Glycerol in the Processing of Yeast Fermented Beverages: A Review. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 52, 7588–7598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Shimazu, Y.; Watanabe, M. Effects of Yeast Strains and Environmental Conditions on Formation of Organic Acids in Must during Fermentation: Studies on Organic Acids in Grape Must and Wine (III). J. Ferment. Technol. 1981, 59, 27–32. [Google Scholar]
  73. Montanari, L.; Perretti, G.; Natella, F.; Guidi, A.; Fantozzi, P. Organic and Phenolic Acids in Beer. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 1999, 32, 535–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Li, H.g.; Liu, F. Changes in Organic Acids during Beer Fermentation. J. Am. Soc. Brew. Chem. 2015, 73, 275–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Guyot-Declerck, C.; François, N.; Ritter, C.; Govaerts, B.; Collin, S. Influence of PH and Ageing on Beer Organoleptic Properties. A Sensory Analysis Based on AEDA Data. Food Qual. Prefer. 2005, 16, 157–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Kaneda, H.; Takashio, M.; Tamaki, T.; Osawa, T. Influence of PH on Flavour Staling during Beer Storage. J. Inst. Brew. 1997, 103, 21–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Klopper, W.J.; Angelino, S.A.G.F.; Tuning, B.; Vermeire, H.A. Organic Acids and Glycerol in Beer. J. Inst. Brew. 1986, 92, 225–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Li, H.; Liu, F. The Chemistry of Sour Taste and the Strategy to Reduce the Sour Taste of Beer. Food Chem. 2015, 185, 200–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Siebert, K.J. Modeling the Flavor Thresholds of Organic Acids in Beer as a Function of Their Molecular Properties. Food Qual. Prefer. 1999, 10, 129–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Oba, T.; Suenaga, H.; Nakayama, S.; Mitsuiki, S.; Kitagaki, H.; Tashiro, K.; Kuhara, S. Properties of a High Malic Acid-Producing Strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Isolated from Sake Mash. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2011, 75, 2025–2029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Saayman, M.; Viljoen-Bloom, M. The Biochemistry of Malic Acid Metabolism by Wine Yeasts–A Review. South Afr. J. Enol. Vitic. 2006, 27, 113–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Volschenk, H.; van Vuuren, H.J.J.; Viljoen–Bloom, M. Malo-Ethanolic Fermentation in Saccharomyces and Schizosaccharomyces. Curr. Genet. 2003, 43, 379–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Schwartz, H.; Radler, F. Formation of l(-)Malate by Saccharomyces cerevisiae during Fermentation. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 1988, 27, 553–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Radler, F. Yeasts-metabolism of organic acids. In Wine Microbiology and Biotechnology; Fleet, G., Ed.; Harwood Academic: Chur, Switzerland, 1993; pp. 165–182. [Google Scholar]
  85. Mendes Ferreira, A.; Mendes-Faia, A. The Role of Yeasts and Lactic Acid Bacteria on the Metabolism of Organic Acids during Winemaking. Foods 2020, 9, 1231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Wang, Q.-M.; Liu, W.-Q.; Liti, G.; Wang, S.-A.; Bai, F.-Y. Surprisingly Diverged Populations of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in Natural Environments Remote from Human Activity. Mol. Ecol. 2012, 21, 5404–5417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Tofalo, R.; Perpetuini, G.; Schirone, M.; Fasoli, G.; Aguzzi, I.; Corsetti, A.; Suzzi, G. Biogeographical Characterization of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Wine Yeast by Molecular Methods. Front. Microbiol. 2013, 4, 166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  88. Liti, G. The Fascinating and Secret Wild Life of the Budding Yeast S. cerevisiae. eLife 2015, 4, e05835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Goddard, M.R.; Greig, D. Saccharomyces cerevisiae: A Nomadic Yeast with No Niche? FEMS Yeast Res. 2015, 15, fov009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Processes 09 01628 g001 550
Figure 1. Flocculation capacity (%) of S. cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C, 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70 strains after 10 min and 30 min at 15 °C.
Figure 1. Flocculation capacity (%) of S. cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C, 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70 strains after 10 min and 30 min at 15 °C.
Processes 09 01628 g001
Processes 09 01628 g002 550
Figure 2. Fermentation kinetics of glucose (A) and maltose (B) in MBW inoculated with S. cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C, 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70.
Figure 2. Fermentation kinetics of glucose (A) and maltose (B) in MBW inoculated with S. cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C, 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70.
Processes 09 01628 g002
Table
Table 1. List of primers used for yeasts identification and the respective PCR conditions.
Table 1. List of primers used for yeasts identification and the respective PCR conditions.
PCR PrimersTarget RegionPrimer SequencesPCR ConditionsReferences
U128S rDNA5′-TGAAATTGTTGAAAGGGAA-3′35 cycles
94 °C 1 min/55 °C 1 min/72 °C 2 min		[26]
U25′-GACTCCTTGGTCCGTGTT-3′
ScHO-f HO gene/chromosome IV5′-GTTAGATCCCAGGCGTAGAACAG-3′35 cycles
94 °C 30 s/61 °C 30 s/72 °C 2 min		[30]
ScHO-r5′-GCGAGTACTGGACCAAATCTTATG-3′
Table
Table 2. Antioxidant activity of S. cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C, 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70 strains by DPPH and ABTS methods. Data are expressed as means ± standard deviation obtained in three independent experiments (n = 3); lower case letters indicate significant differences within row (p < 0.05).
Table 2. Antioxidant activity of S. cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C, 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70 strains by DPPH and ABTS methods. Data are expressed as means ± standard deviation obtained in three independent experiments (n = 3); lower case letters indicate significant differences within row (p < 0.05).
Antioxidant Activity
(µg Trolox Eq./mg Cell Protein)		CSB21BCS1C41CMCS2CW-34/70
ABTS5.91 ± 0.14 b4.93 ± 0.11 c4.56 ± 0.26 d5.13 ± 0.20 c6.48 ± 0.26 a
DPPH0.98 ± 0.08 a0.95 ± 0.06 a0.93 ± 0.03 a0.85 ± 0.05 a0.96 ± 0.09 a
Table
Table 3. Chemical characteristics of fermented products obtained by using S.cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C, 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70 as starter cultures. Data are expressed as means ± standard deviation obtained in three independent experiments (n = 3); lower case letters indicate significant differences within row (p < 0.05).
Table 3. Chemical characteristics of fermented products obtained by using S.cerevisiae CSB21B, CS1C, CS2C, 41CM and S. pastorianus W-34/70 as starter cultures. Data are expressed as means ± standard deviation obtained in three independent experiments (n = 3); lower case letters indicate significant differences within row (p < 0.05).
CSB21BCS1C41CMCS2CW-34/70
pH3.4 ± 0.2 a3.4 ± 0.1 a3.1 ± 0.2 a3.5 ± 0.3 a3.6 ± 0.2 a
SO2 (mg/L)20.1 ± 1.6 a13.4 ± 0.9 b7.0 ± 0.2 c2.0 ± 0.1 d8.6 ± 0.6 c
Acetaldehyde (mg/L)16.5 ± 0.7 a9.8 ± 0.4 c6.2 ± 0.5 d11.7 ± 0.9 b6.6 ± 0.3 d
Acetic acid (mg/L)11.6 ± 1.2 a13.0 ± 1.5 a8.2 ± 0.4 b8.1 ± 0.6 b7.7 ± 0.4 c
Alcohol (% vol)4.4 ± 0.2 a4.2 ± 0.2 a4.3 ± 0.4 a4.0 ± 0.2 a4.2 ± 0.3 a
Citric acid (mg/L)6.2 ± 0.8 c12.0 ± 0.7 a12.2 ± 1.1 a11.1 ± 1.1 a9.6 ± 0.4 b
Diacetyl (µg/L)201.3 ± 18.0 d282.7 ± 20.1 c293.7 ± 11.9 c466.3 ± 7.2 a364.7 ± 23.4 b
Glycerol (g/L)2.4 ± 0.2 a1.7 ± 0.2 b1.7 ± 0.1 b2.0 ± 0.2 a1.7 ± 0.2 b
D-lactic acid (mg/L)44.0 ± 1.7 c74.1 ± 3.2 a44.2 ± 3.9 c40.7 ± 2.0 c54.4 ± 4.7 b
L-malic acid (mg/L)29.0 ± 1.3 a22.8 ± 1.5 b10.6 ± 0.4 d17.4 ± 0.8 c8.7 ± 0.2 d
Succinic acid (mg/L)47.8 ± 2.9 e91.1 ± 2.8 d126.0 ± 3.8 b147.0 ± 8.6 a112.0 ± 4.0 c
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Iorizzo, M.; Letizia, F.; Albanese, G.; Coppola, F.; Gambuti, A.; Testa, B.; Aversano, R.; Forino, M.; Coppola, R. Potential for Lager Beer Production from Saccharomyces cerevisiae Strains Isolated from the Vineyard Environment. Processes 2021, 9, 1628. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9091628

AMA Style

Iorizzo M, Letizia F, Albanese G, Coppola F, Gambuti A, Testa B, Aversano R, Forino M, Coppola R. Potential for Lager Beer Production from Saccharomyces cerevisiae Strains Isolated from the Vineyard Environment. Processes. 2021; 9(9):1628. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9091628

Chicago/Turabian Style

Iorizzo, Massimo, Francesco Letizia, Gianluca Albanese, Francesca Coppola, Angelita Gambuti, Bruno Testa, Riccardo Aversano, Martino Forino, and Raffaele Coppola. 2021. "Potential for Lager Beer Production from Saccharomyces cerevisiae Strains Isolated from the Vineyard Environment" Processes 9, no. 9: 1628. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9091628

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop