Lactic acid bacterium and yeast microbiotas of 19 sourdoughs used for traditional/typical Italian breads: Interactions between ingredients and microbial species diversity

188Citations
Citations of this article
197Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The study of the microbiotas of 19 Italian sourdoughs used for the manufacture of traditional/typical breads allowed the identification, through a culture-dependent approach, of 20 and 4 species of lactic acid bacteria (LAB) and yeasts, respectively. Numerically, the most frequent LAB isolates were Lactobacillus sanfranciscensis (ca. 28% of the total LAB isolates), Lactobacillus plantarum (ca. 16%), and Lactobacillus paralimentarius (ca. 14%). Saccharomyces cerevisiae was identified in 16 sourdoughs. Candida humilis, Kazachstania barnettii, and Kazachstania exigua were also identified. As shown by principal component analysis (PCA), a correlation was found between the ingredients, especially the type of flour, the microbial community, and the biochemical features of sourdoughs. Triticum durum flours were characterized by the high level of maltose, glucose, fructose, and free amino acids (FAA) correlated with the sole or main presence of obligately heterofermentative LAB, the lowest number of facultatively heterofermentative strains, and the low cell density of yeasts in the mature sourdoughs. This study highlighted, through a comprehensive and comparative approach, the dominant microbiotas of 19 Italian sourdoughs, which determined some of the peculiarities of the resulting traditional/typical Italian breads. © 2012, American Society for Microbiology.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Minervini, F., Di Cagno, R., Lattanzi, A., De Angelis, M., Antonielli, L., Cardinali, G., … Gobbetti, M. (2012). Lactic acid bacterium and yeast microbiotas of 19 sourdoughs used for traditional/typical Italian breads: Interactions between ingredients and microbial species diversity. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 78(4), 1251–1264. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.07721-11

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free