The why of yeast's buzz-giving ways

David Silverman / Getty Images

The alcohol in wine, seen here being poured in a file photo for a tasting in Tel Aviv, Israel, is produced by yeast. Scientists are piecing together the evolutionary history of how and why yeast do this, which in turn could lead to new yeast strains for wine and beer fermentation as well as biofuel production.

Wine and beer drinkers of the world owe a lot of gratitude to yeast, the unicellular fungi that ferment sugars to ethanol, giving the fruit- and grain-based drinks their sought-after alcoholic kick. Now, scientists are closing in on just how and why yeast evolved to do this.

No, it wasn't to get humans drunk.

The special trick of yeast is the ability to ferment sugar to 2-carbon components, in particular ethanol, without completely oxidizing it to carbon dioxide, even in the presence of excess oxygen. This allows yeasts to out-compete other microorganisms.


A team of European researchers led by the yeast molecular genetics group at Lund University in Sweden has been trying to reconstruct the evolutionary history of ethanol production. In their latest effort, the team compared the genetic makeup of two wine yeasts: Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Dekkera bruxellensis.

The yeasts separated more than 200 million years ago and are not closely rated. However, the research shows that approximately 100 to 150 million years ago, both yeasts experienced similar environmental conditions and pressure: the appearance of sugar-laden fruits and competition from other microbes. 

The pressure, the researchers found, spurred both lineages, independently and in parallel, to develop the ability to make and accumulate ethanol in the presence of oxygen, and developed resistance to high ethanol concentration, and have been using this ability as a weapon to out-compete other microbes which are sensitive to ethanol.

Surprisingly, the team notes, both yeasts used the same molecular tool, global promoter rewiring, to change the regulation pattern of the expression of respiration-associated genes involved in sugar degradation, which allows ethanol to accumulate. The excess ethanol is toxic to other microbes. 

"Our results now help to reconstruct the original environment and evolutionary trends within the microbial community in the remote past," team leader Jure Piskur, a professor of molecular genetics at Lund University and the University of Nova Gorica, Slovenia, said in a news release

"In addition, we can now use the knowledge we have obtained to develop new yeast strains, which could be beneficial for wine and beer fermentation and in biofuel production."

A paper describing the latest research effort appears in Nature Communications.

More stories about yeast and drink:


John Roach is a contributing writer for msnbc.com. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by hitting the "like" button on the Cosmic Log Facebook page or following msnbc.com's science editor, Alan Boyle, on Twitter (@b0yle).

 

Discuss this post

Interesting article. You wrote rated instead of related when discussing the linkage of the two yeasts in the paragraph about how long ago they separated from each other. That being said, I'll do a beer shot in honor of yeast tonight.

    Reply#1 - Thu May 12, 2011 8:33 AM EDT

    Hmmmm......just wondering......could this component of yeast bread, be the real reason why everyone so loved my dear mother's yeast rolls?? Were we all getting a little tipsy and just didn't know??

      Reply#2 - Thu May 12, 2011 8:58 AM EDT

      Doubt it - the heat drives the alcohol off. Maybe the rolls just tasted really good.

        #2.1 - Thu May 12, 2011 1:57 PM EDT
        Reply

        nature knows best.. why not follow its lead..ruther then trying. to force to lead?

          Reply#3 - Thu May 12, 2011 5:52 PM EDT

          If we all had that attitude we'd still be dying when we are 30 and living in sub-sahara africa.

            #3.1 - Thu May 12, 2011 7:28 PM EDT
            Reply

            Remember several months back our lovely scientists said that wine was bad for you? Then about a week later they said it was good for you. Another week later they said it was bad again. HOLD ON a week after that they said it was good for you yet again.

            Drinking coffee was BAD for you a couple of weeks ago and yesterday they said it cured breast cancer.

            I say scientists are bad for your mental health!

              Reply#4 - Thu May 12, 2011 8:13 PM EDT

              well said dave..so what are they saying NOW :-)

              And as for " Nature knows best" see what they say about " Jet propulsion" and moluscs ;-))

                Reply#5 - Fri May 13, 2011 4:33 AM EDT
                You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.