Saccharomyces cerevisiae nutrient signaling pathways show an unexpected early activation pattern during winemaking.
Nitrogen Catabolite Repression
Nutrient signaling pathways
Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Snf1
TORC1
Wine
Journal
Microbial cell factories
ISSN: 1475-2859
Titre abrégé: Microb Cell Fact
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101139812
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Jun 2020
06 Jun 2020
Historique:
received:
02
01
2020
accepted:
27
05
2020
entrez:
8
6
2020
pubmed:
9
6
2020
medline:
4
2
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Saccharomyces cerevisiae wine strains can develop stuck or sluggish fermentations when nutrients are scarce or suboptimal. Nutrient sensing and signaling pathways, such as PKA, TORC1 and Snf1, work coordinately to adapt growth and metabolism to the amount and balance of the different nutrients in the medium. This has been exhaustively studied in laboratory strains of S. cerevisiae and laboratory media, but much less under industrial conditions. Inhibitors of such pathways, like rapamycin or 2-deoxyglucose, failed to discriminate between commercial wine yeast strains with different nutritional requirements, but evidenced genetic variability among industrial isolates, and between laboratory and commercial strains. Most signaling pathways involve events of protein phosphorylation that can be followed as markers of their activity. The main pathway to promote growth in the presence of nitrogen, the TORC1 pathway, measured by the phosphorylation of Rps6 and Par32, proved active at the very start of fermentation, mainly on day 1, and ceased soon afterward, even before cellular growth stopped. Transcription factor Gln3, which activates genes subject to nitrogen catabolite repression, was also active for the first hours, even when ammonium and amino acids were still present in media. Snf1 kinase was activated only when glucose was exhausted under laboratory conditions, but was active from early fermentation stages. The same results were generally obtained when nitrogen was limiting, which indicates a unique pathway activation pattern in winemaking. As PKA remained active throughout fermentation, it could be the central pathway that controls others, provided sugars are present. Wine fermentation is a distinct environmental situation from growth in laboratory media in molecular terms. The mechanisms involved in glucose and nitrogen repression respond differently under winemaking conditions.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Saccharomyces cerevisiae wine strains can develop stuck or sluggish fermentations when nutrients are scarce or suboptimal. Nutrient sensing and signaling pathways, such as PKA, TORC1 and Snf1, work coordinately to adapt growth and metabolism to the amount and balance of the different nutrients in the medium. This has been exhaustively studied in laboratory strains of S. cerevisiae and laboratory media, but much less under industrial conditions.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Inhibitors of such pathways, like rapamycin or 2-deoxyglucose, failed to discriminate between commercial wine yeast strains with different nutritional requirements, but evidenced genetic variability among industrial isolates, and between laboratory and commercial strains. Most signaling pathways involve events of protein phosphorylation that can be followed as markers of their activity. The main pathway to promote growth in the presence of nitrogen, the TORC1 pathway, measured by the phosphorylation of Rps6 and Par32, proved active at the very start of fermentation, mainly on day 1, and ceased soon afterward, even before cellular growth stopped. Transcription factor Gln3, which activates genes subject to nitrogen catabolite repression, was also active for the first hours, even when ammonium and amino acids were still present in media. Snf1 kinase was activated only when glucose was exhausted under laboratory conditions, but was active from early fermentation stages. The same results were generally obtained when nitrogen was limiting, which indicates a unique pathway activation pattern in winemaking. As PKA remained active throughout fermentation, it could be the central pathway that controls others, provided sugars are present.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Wine fermentation is a distinct environmental situation from growth in laboratory media in molecular terms. The mechanisms involved in glucose and nitrogen repression respond differently under winemaking conditions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32505207
doi: 10.1186/s12934-020-01381-6
pii: 10.1186/s12934-020-01381-6
pmc: PMC7275465
doi:
Substances chimiques
Culture Media
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
124Subventions
Organisme : Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades
ID : AGL2017-83254-R
Références
Mol Cell Biol. 2014 Dec;34(24):4420-35
pubmed: 25266663
Mol Cell. 2012 Apr 13;46(1):105-10
pubmed: 22424774
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Sep 30;105(39):15166-71
pubmed: 18812505
Sci Rep. 2017 Jul 18;7(1):5703
pubmed: 28720901
Mol Cell Biol. 2002 Feb;22(4):1246-52
pubmed: 11809814
PLoS Genet. 2018 Apr 26;14(4):e1007334
pubmed: 29698392
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 May 14;99(10):6784-9
pubmed: 11997479
J Biol Chem. 2015 Jul 3;290(27):16786-96
pubmed: 25947383
Mol Biol Cell. 2016 Jan 15;27(2):397-409
pubmed: 26582391
J Biosci Bioeng. 2001;91(2):184-9
pubmed: 16232972
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2012 Apr;78(8):2748-57
pubmed: 22327582
Sci Rep. 2018 Nov 7;8(1):16500
pubmed: 30405153
Genetics. 2019 Aug;212(4):1205-1225
pubmed: 31213504
Cell Discov. 2016 Mar 08;2:15049
pubmed: 27462445
Yeast. 1998 Jul;14(10):953-61
pubmed: 9717241
G3 (Bethesda). 2016 Apr 07;6(4):957-71
pubmed: 26869621
FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2014 Mar;38(2):254-99
pubmed: 24483210
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Sep 27;102(39):13933-8
pubmed: 16172400
PLoS One. 2013 Apr 26;8(4):e61645
pubmed: 23658613
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Sep 22;106(38):16333-8
pubmed: 19805302
FEMS Yeast Res. 2014 Aug;14(5):683-96
pubmed: 24738657
Yeast. 2008 Oct;25(10):745-54
pubmed: 18949820
Mol Biol Cell. 2010 Oct 1;21(19):3475-86
pubmed: 20702584
Mol Microbiol. 2016 Jan;99(2):360-79
pubmed: 26419331
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 13;10(3):e0120250
pubmed: 25767889
PLoS One. 2015 Feb 06;10(2):e0117267
pubmed: 25658705
FEMS Yeast Res. 2001 Jul;1(2):111-25
pubmed: 12702356
Physiol Genomics. 2000 Aug 09;3(2):83-92
pubmed: 11015603
J Biol Chem. 2006 Oct 20;281(42):31616-26
pubmed: 16923813
Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2011 Mar;89(5):1537-49
pubmed: 21246356
Methods Enzymol. 2002;350:87-96
pubmed: 12073338
PLoS Genet. 2015 Jul 14;11(7):e1005382
pubmed: 26172854
Sci Rep. 2017 Sep 29;7(1):12414
pubmed: 28963559
Mol Microbiol. 2008 Jul;69(1):277-85
pubmed: 18513215
Yeast. 2019 Jan;36(1):65-74
pubmed: 30094872
Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2018 Feb 7;82(1):
pubmed: 29436478
Lett Appl Microbiol. 2017 Feb;64(2):103-110
pubmed: 27714822
Exp Gerontol. 2010 Aug;45(7-8):533-42
pubmed: 20382214
J Biol Chem. 2007 Jun 8;282(23):16838-45
pubmed: 17438333
Yeast. 1997 Aug;13(10):903-15
pubmed: 9271106
Yeast. 2003 Dec;20(16):1369-85
pubmed: 14663829
Mech Ageing Dev. 2012 May;133(5):348-58
pubmed: 22738658
J Appl Microbiol. 2009 Jul;107(1):47-55
pubmed: 19245406
FEMS Yeast Res. 2004 Mar;4(6):625-32
pubmed: 15040951