Abstract
Members of the genus Hanseniaspora represent a significant proportion of the normal flora of grape berries and play a significant role in wine fermentation. Here, we present genome sequences for three species of Hanseniaspora, H. opuntiae, H. osmophila, and H. uvarum, which were isolated from spontaneous Chardonnay wine fermentation.
GENOME ANNOUNCEMENT
Members of the genus Hanseniaspora represent a significant proportion of the normal flora of grape berries and play a significant role in wine fermentation (1). Besides a role in grape wine fermentation, Hanseniaspora species have been used as starter cultures in the fermentation of fruit wines, ciders, and spirits (2–5) and cocoa (6, 7).
One isolate of each of three species of Hanseniaspora, AWRI3578 (H. opuntiae), AWRI3579 (H. osmophila), and AWRI3580 (H. uvarum), were obtained from spontaneously fermenting Chardonnay grape must (Adelaide Hills, South Australia, Australia) in 2014. Each isolate was identified to the species level by sequence identity analysis of a fragment of the rDNA internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region (8) against the QIIME UNITE database (ver6_dynamic_s_10.09.2014), with results corroborated against the NCBI nr database using Blast (AWRI3579, 99% identity with H. osmophila CBS 313T; AWRI3578, 98% identity with H. opuntiae CBS 8873T; AWRI3580, 100% identity with H. uvarum CBS 314T).
Sequencing was performed using a combination of Illumina Nextera mate-pair (2- to 5-kb and 6- to 12-kb size selected) and TruSeq PCR-free sequencing libraries that were prepared from purified DNA and run using 2 × 300 bp MiSeq chemistry (Ramaciotti Centre for Functional Genomics, Australia). Sequences for each isolate were assembled using MIRA (version 4.0.2 [http://sourceforge.net/projects/mira-assembler/]) with the resultant contigs (in .ace format) manually refined using SeqManPro (DNAStar, USA).
The genomes of statistics of AWRI3578 (H. opuntiae) and AWRI3580 (H. uvarum) were very similar (Table 1), while AWRI3579 (H. osmophila) produced a far larger but also more fragmented assembly at the contig level; however, the contigs were readily connected by scaffolding to produce a similar number of scaffolds as the other two species.
TABLE 1 .
Genome assembly statistics
| Strain | Presumptive species (ITS sequence) | No. of contigs | No. of scaffolds | Assembly size (Mb) | Contig N50 (kb) | Accession no. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AWRI3578 | Hanseniaspora opuntiae | 67 | 18 | 8.83 | 636 | LPNL00000000 |
| AWRI3579 | Hanseniaspora osmophila | 899 | 17 | 11.37 | 8 | LPNM00000000 |
| AWRI3580 | Hanseniaspora uvarum | 44 | 18 | 8.81 | 739 | LPNN00000000 |
Augustus annotation (9) predicted 4,176, 4,061, and 4,660 proteins for AWRI3578, AWRI3580, and AWRI3579, respectively. Of these, 3,391, 3,410, and 4,187 proteins could be assigned to OrthoMCL clusters (10, 11). Both the size and predicted protein content of the AWRI3578 and AWWRI3580 genomes are similar to that of H. valbyensis (http://genome.jgi.doe.gov/Hanva1_1/Hanva1_1.home.html), while the AWRI3579 genome assembly was similar in size and coding potential to that of H. vinae (12). The differences observed in genome size and coding potential are consistent with phylogenies produced by both concatenating 2,045 orthologous proteins predicted in this work from the five species, and from 26S rRNA gene (13), which position H. opuntiae, H. uvarum, and H. valbyensis as a distinct clade and H. valbyensis and H. osmophila as a separate sister group.
Accession number(s).
These whole-genome shotgun projects have been deposited in DDBJ/ENA/GenBank under the accession numbers provided in Table 1. The versions described in this paper are the first versions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Special thanks to Louisa Rosa and Alana Seabrook of Yalumba and Alison Soden of Treasury Wine Estates for supplying must and wild fermentation samples. The Australian Wine Research Institute is a member of the Wine Innovation Cluster in Adelaide.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by Australian grape growers and winemakers through their investment body, Wine Australia, with matching funds from the Australian government and was partially funded by the UNSW Science Leveraging Fund.
Footnotes
Citation Sternes PR, Lee D, Kutyna DR, Borneman AR. 2016. Genome sequences of three species of Hanseniaspora isolated from spontaneous wine fermentations. Genome Announc 4(6):e01287-16. doi:10.1128/genomeA.01287-16.
REFERENCES
- 1.Jolly NP, Varela C, Pretorius IS. 2014. Not your ordinary yeast: non-Saccharomyces yeasts in wine production uncovered. FEMS Yeast Res 14:215–237. doi: 10.1111/1567-1364.12111. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Mingorance-Cazorla L, Clemente-Jiménez JM, Martínez-Rodríguez S, Heras-Vázquez FJL, Rodríguez-Vico F. 2003. Contribution of different natural yeasts to the aroma of two alcoholic beverages. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 19:297–304. doi: 10.1023/A:1023662409828. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 3.De Arruda Moura Pietrowski G, dos Santos CM, Sauer E, Wosiacki G, Nogueira A. 2012. Influence of fermentation with Hanseniaspora sp. yeast on the volatile profile of fermented apple. J Agric Food Chem 60:9815–9821. doi: 10.1021/jf302290k. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Rodríguez Madrera R, Pando Bedriñana R, García Hevia A, Arce MB, Suárez Valles B. 2013. Production of spirits from dry apple pomace and selected yeasts. Food Bioprod Process 91:623–631. doi: 10.1016/j.fbp.2013.04.005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Xu Y, Zhao GA, Wang LP. 2006. Controlled formation of volatile components in cider making using a combination of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Hanseniaspora valbyensis yeast species. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 33:192–196. doi: 10.1007/s10295-005-0051-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Moreira IMDV, Miguel MGDCP, Duarte WF, Dias DR, Schwan RF. 2013. Microbial succession and the dynamics of metabolites and sugars during the fermentation of three different cocoa (Theobroma cacao L.) hybrids. Food Res Int 54:9–17. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2013.06.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Batista NN, Ramos CL, Dias DR, Pinheiro AC, Schwan RF. 2016. The impact of yeast starter cultures on the microbial communities and volatile compounds in cocoa fermentation and the resulting sensory attributes of chocolate. J Food Sci Technol 53:1101–1110. doi: 10.1007/s13197-015-2132-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Bokulich NA, Mills DA. 2013. Improved selection of internal transcribed spacer-specific primers enables quantitative, ultra-high-throughput profiling of fungal communities. Appl Environ Microbiol 79:2519–2526. doi: 10.1128/AEM.03870-12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Stanke M, Morgenstern B. 2005. Augustus: a Web server for gene prediction in eukaryotes that allows user-defined constraints. Nucleic Acids Res 33:W465–W467. doi: 10.1093/nar/gki458. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Fischer S, Brunk BP, Chen F, Gao X, Harb OS, Iodice JB, Shanmugam D, Roos DS, Stoeckert CJ. 2011. Using OrthoMCL to assign proteins to OrthoMCL-DB groups or to cluster proteomes into new ortholog groups. Curr Protoc Bioinformatics 6:1–19. doi: 10.1002/0471250953.bi0612s35. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Li L, Stoeckert CJ, Roos DS. 2003. OrthoMCL: identification of ortholog groups for eukaryotic genomes. Genome Res 13:2178–2189. doi: 10.1101/gr.1224503. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Giorello FM, Berná L, Greif G, Camesasca L, Salzman V, Medina K, Robello C, Gaggero C, Aguilar PS, Carrau F. 2014. Genome sequence of the native apiculate wine yeast Hanseniaspora vineae T02/19AF. Genome Announc 2(3):e00530-14. doi: 10.1128/genomeA.00530-14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Cadez N, Poot GA, Raspor P, Smith MT. 2003. Hanseniaspora meyeri sp. nov., Hanseniaspora clermontiae sp. nov., Hanseniaspora lachancei sp. nov. and Hanseniaspora opuntiae sp. nov., novel apiculate yeast species. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 53:1671–1680. doi: 10.1099/ijs.0.02618-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]