Quantcast

Interesting genome sequencing of some yeasts

HomeBrewTalk.com - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Community.

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

sykesey

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
40
Reaction score
33
So i've been finding more evidence that WLP800 is s.cerevisiae from some genome sequence reads, and in my travels I found this, the submission date is Feb/19 but the genome reads were uploaded at the end of August.

Here's the link to the study from Langdon et al which appears to have been run for a paper investigating the lineage of eubayanus hybrids, i.e. modern lager yeast

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/709535v1.article-info

The data is in here:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bioproject/PRJNA522928

And more interesting is the table of data
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Traces/study/?acc=SRP219635
(sort by sample name descending to see the WLP/WY strains)

I am not sure of the methodology used to determine the genotypes of the yeast, but if the organism taxonomy is to believed and these are the right strains analysed then some interesting findings...

WLP029 Kolsch could be Pastorianus not ale
WLP515 could be Pastorianus
WLP838 S.German Lager could be Cerevisiae
WY1187 Ringwood could be pastorianus
WLP800 probably confirmed further to be cerevisiae
WLP351 could be a cerevisiae x eubayanus x uvarum hybrid

I emailed the author last night as well as Mr Suregork so will see if anyone more qualified in genomics than I am has some insight...

Not sure if it changes much, I guess with WLP051 Cal V turning out to be Pastorianus and lots of "lager" breweries turning out to actually be using "ale" yeasts it's not surprising
 

Vale71

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2018
Messages
2,640
Reaction score
1,333
Be advised that the identifications are only unqualified guesswork. The original papers only identify the strains using anonimous numbers, so what the author of the taxonomy calls "WLP800" could very well be anything else.
IMHO short of doing your own sequencing to see if BE97 is really WLP800 instead of something else you're better off disregarding this before giving birth to some more homebrew myths.
 

suregork

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
87
Reaction score
105
Location
Helsinki, Finland
Thanks sykesey for sharing! Very interesting stuff! The organism/hybrid designations are based on whole-genome sequence data and should be accurate. This is from one of the top yeast genomics labs in the world, so they know what they are doing.

Vale71, this is a completely separate study to the Gallone 2016 one. Here they've sequenced a large number of White Labs and Wyeast strains, and the strains are refered to with their original names. So no decoding or guesswork involved. WLP800 and WLP838 definitely seem to be ale yeasts, while WLP029, WLP051 and WLP515 are lager yeasts
 

Vale71

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2018
Messages
2,640
Reaction score
1,333
Vale71, this is a completely separate study to the Gallone 2016 one. Here they've sequenced a large number of White Labs and Wyeast strains, and the strains are refered to with their original names. So no decoding or guesswork involved. WLP800 and WLP838 definitely seem to be ale yeasts, while WLP029, WLP051 and WLP515 are lager yeasts
Sorry, I missed that.

The results are really surprising, to say the least.
 

Northern_Brewer

British - apparently some US company stole my name
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
2,128
Location
UK
Be advised that the identifications are only unqualified guesswork. The original papers only identify the strains using anonimous numbers, so what the author of the taxonomy calls "WLP800" could very well be anything else.
You're referring to Suregork et al's original attempts to identify strains in the Gallone/White-Labs paper. For one thing - they were very clear about their confidence levels, some were confirmed by known sequences from other sources, some just fitted the pattern (US-UK-German etc just looked too much like WLP001/2/3 to be a coincidence when the US one was known to be 001), and they were clear that there were a few that just didn't fit. And White Labs confirmed many of them in updates to their own catalogue, only a few of the original guesses - all of them "we're doubtful" ones - were wrong. And then we've had other labs sequence genomes that haven't had a commercial interest in secrecy, so it's only been odd ones like WLP515 that we haven't been sure about.

It will be interesting to drill down to the detail - WL029 and Wyeast 1187 have previously been placed on the main ale family tree, it could be something like a small chunk of eubayanus DNA rather than a "full" lager hybrid. Kinda cute that WLP838 Southern German Lager is an ale yeast like WLP800, which would make sense in terms of the history, hopefully it will prove to be a kolsch yeast.

Also hopefully 1272 will prove to be a BRY-97 relative, and LondonESB close to Windsor as suggested by @isomerization 's PCRs.

Also notable that the "Chimay" group of Abbaye, WLP500 Monastery and 1214 Belgian Abbey are a kudriavzevii hybrid, which is usually found in wine yeasts. You can imagine monks buying some wine barrels and then either filling them with beer or using the lees for brewing.
 

lump42

The Lajestic Vantrashell of Lob
HBT Supporter
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
1,084
Reaction score
639
Location
Bluegrass Region
How do any of these recent studies affect the practical aspects of these strains? Or is this all purely academic at this point?
 

Vale71

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2018
Messages
2,640
Reaction score
1,333
You're referring to Suregork et al's original attempts to identify strains in the Gallone/White-Labs paper.
Yeah, we cleared that up a couple of posts ago.
Seems that this new study has confirmed that at least two lager strains do not have any eubayanus DNA and therefore do not originate from the same hybridization event. This will certainly offer opportunities for further reasearch as clearly there must be more than one single point of origin for lager yeasts. I think will all agree that these yeasts do not exhibit typical ale behaviour (I wonder if they pass the melibiose test?) and there must be a reason for that.
 

lump42

The Lajestic Vantrashell of Lob
HBT Supporter
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
1,084
Reaction score
639
Location
Bluegrass Region
Yeah, we cleared that up a couple of posts ago.
Seems that this new study has confirmed that at least two lager strains do not have any eubayanus DNA and therefore do not originate from the same hybridization event. This will certainly offer opportunities for further reasearch as clearly there must be more than one single point of origin for lager yeasts. I think will all agree that these yeasts do not exhibit typical ale behaviour (I wonder if they pass the melibiose test?) and there must be a reason for that.
I would expect them to consume melibiose. That was one the phenotypic tests to separate the species before genomics.
 

Vale71

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2018
Messages
2,640
Reaction score
1,333
Then why weren't they considered ale yeast if they passed the test?
 

Vale71

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2018
Messages
2,640
Reaction score
1,333
No, it was indeed melibiose. Inability of any strain not to ferment maltotriose has never been proven.
 

Northern_Brewer

British - apparently some US company stole my name
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
2,128
Location
UK
This will certainly offer opportunities for further reasearch as clearly there must be more than one single point of origin for lager yeasts. I think will all agree that these yeasts do not exhibit typical ale behaviour (I wonder if they pass the melibiose test?) and there must be a reason for that.
Depends what you mean by a "lager yeast". Talking about a point of origin implies you're talking about them in the genetic sense, and for geneticists a lager yeast used to be the informal name for S.pastorianus and now would be for any cerevisiae x eubayanus cross.

For a biochemist, it would be a brewing yeast that can produce alpha galactosidase and so can eat melibiose, a microbiologist would define it as one that can't grow at 37C. In commercial brewing, it's any yeast used to make beer that's sold as lager, and in homebrew it's any yeast isolated from a beer sold as lager, regardless of whether it was actually used to ferment it.

If the Gallone et al survey told us anything, it's that all kinds of yeast -even saison relatives - get used to make beer that is sold as lager. But it's not particularly helpful to say that all such yeasts are "lager yeast". And we know that when humans try to classify things into nice neat boxes, biology usually finds a way to make things messy.

For instance, if I told you without showing you pictures of a mammal weighing around 300lb that spends most of its life squatting on its haunches eating plants, then you'd probably think, based on its diet and behaviour, that it belonged to the primates, it was some kind of gorilla or something. But if I showed you a picture of a panda, you'd recognise it immediately as a bear. Even though they are members of the order Carnivora and are not designed for eating plants, there's still one of them that just eats bamboo.

There's a lot of pandas in the world of yeast.

They haven't heard of the rules and so instead of fitting into nice tight boxes, they bend the rules in various ways, the boundaries are much fuzzier than traditionally thought. So if Frohbergs like 34/70 are OK fermenting warm, or ale yeasts are happy at "lager" temperatures, then that's OK, biology is like that.
 

dmtaylor

Lord Idiot the Lazy
HBT Supporter
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
4,138
Reaction score
2,257
Location
Two Rivers, WI
Depends what you mean by a "lager yeast".
It may be time to outlaw now-meaningless terms such "lager" vs. "ale" vs. "bottom-fermenting" and "top-fermenting", and just refer to each strain by its commercial name only. That's best and easiest. Otherwise the only correct general terms now are species S. pastorianus and S. cerevisiae (as well as of course all those other pesky ones like S. eubayanus, Brettanomyces abcdefg, etc.).

I'm gonna go have a beer. It's all beer. I think I'll have some of the S. pastorianus kind tonight. Cheers all.
 

Robert65

Major Obvious (recently promoted)
HBT Supporter
Joined
Jul 15, 2019
Messages
1,891
Reaction score
2,360
Location
Akron, Ohio
I'm gonna go have a beer. It's all beer. I think I'll have some of the S. pastorianus kind tonight. Cheers all.
I think I'll have one that is bright, golden, and, when served rather cold, is crisp and bracingly refreshing, redolent of Saaz hops, underpinned by clean, sweet malt, and with only the faintest fruitiness and perhaps a hint of diacetyl. I won't even ask what yeast was used or other details of how it was produced (though you all can probably guess.) I've already described everything that affects my choice. Cheers!
 
OP
sykesey

sykesey

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
40
Reaction score
33
Hey everyone, sorry I was stuck in HBT post limbo for the past day as i had a new account and could only post 5 in 24 hours.

The owner of the data (Quinn Langdon) got back to me and the genome sequences aren't from the paper I linked but an upcoming paper about hybridisation of commonly used yeast strains. Not sure when it comes out for pre-release / peer-review, but soon. I quote

"Hybrids were identified using the whole genome data and a pipeline called sppIDer (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30184140). The paper that goes with this data should be coming out soon and, indeed, there are some hidden surprises of some strains that are sold as one thing but are actually hybrids"

I was able to run some BLAST queries using a couple of Eubayanus primers (thanks to Suregork's papers with the details) against the genome reads and verify that WLP029 at least had some Eubayanus DNA. How much of the DNA they have is something I hope the paper goes into, as well as hopefully Suregork running an updated family tree with this new data.

The WLP838 / 800 connection for me is definitely interesting (maybe 838 is the missing link to where 800 came from originally via Groll's trip from Bavaria to Pilsen). I just did a split wort test between Kolsch yeasts (Lalbrew dry, WLP029, and GY021) so it might be worth running the same again with WLP838 and WLP800 and see how they go in that style. I'll probably write the initial experiment up when i get a chance to set up my blog again.

In terms of what this means, yeah it can be academic but there may be some practical applications. WLP838 and WLP800 may end up being just fine to use at ale/hybrid temps and market the resulting beer as Ale! Anything brewed with Ringwood you could potentially call a Lager (not the German sense unless you cold condition but because you're using a pastorianus strain)... Also with the genome data there's yet another chance to add to an updated family tree and maybe link back to some of the Gallone yeast identification.

But end of the day, if they make beer that tastes good and is in the right style, doesn't really matter that much
 

Vale71

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2018
Messages
2,640
Reaction score
1,333
For a biochemist, it would be a brewing yeast that can produce alpha galactosidase and so can eat melibiose...
I'll take that one, only the other way around as it's actually bottom-fermenting that can't eat melibiose.
What I mean is, there are obviously macroscopic differences between the two groups, however you define them. It would be certainly interesting, if only from an academic standpoint, to understand how those differences came about from a genetic standpoint.
 
OP
sykesey

sykesey

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
40
Reaction score
33
So I have managed to get the sppIDer program set up with the genome base data and ran some of the sequence reads through it, managed to get a couple of results, not that it means that much as they've already been classified. But for instance here's the plot of how much of the sequence reads maps to the various genome types - Scer = cerevisiae, Seub = eubayanus, Suva = Uvarum. This is for WLP838 - tells us it's mainly cerevisiae. I haven't managed to run the full thing yet but the graph it creates at the start gives a good idea of the classification.

I was reading more about WLP838 and everyone says its a bit weird, forms a krausen, works OK at higher temps, throws out a lot of sulfur at lower temps... would be really interested to see where it fits in the family tree

wlp838_run6.jpg



And here's WLP029... pink is eubayanus

Screen Shot 2019-09-12 at 3.33.00 pm.png
 

Northern_Brewer

British - apparently some US company stole my name
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
2,128
Location
UK
I'll take that one, only the other way around as it's actually bottom-fermenting that can't eat melibiose.
I think you might want to check that... :)

Oh, and bottom/top fermenting is another of those panda classifications. Although skimming open fermenters selected strongly for ale strains that float, the move to conicals selected for ale strains that sink, so a lot of ale strains look like bottom fermenters these days, it seems to be a pretty mutable characteristic that is strongly selected for depending on fermenter type.

What I mean is, there are obviously macroscopic differences between the two groups, however you define them. It would be certainly interesting, if only from an academic standpoint, to understand how those differences came about from a genetic standpoint.
My point is that just trying to define a group is fraught with problems, the boundaries are just too fuzzy. But things like melibiose metabolism are well understood - indeed that paper linked to by mediant goes into some detail.

The genomics of yeast get pretty complicated, as the selection pressure of a brewing environment has caused a lot of large-scale duplications in genomes, as well as them fairly freely swapping bits of genome with other species.

How do any of these recent studies affect the practical aspects of these strains? Or is this all purely academic at this point?
Number 1 - it's just really interesting, and can also illuminate some of the history of how yeast got swapped around etc.

Number 2 - you have to be a bit wary of relationships - nobody is more closely related to you than your parents, but one of them has very different lumps and bumps to you! But at the same time thee family trees can help see things that aren't immediately obvious - for instance T-58 looks like a POF+ version of S-33/Windsor, the small POF gene cassette produces a very obvious change in flavour, but otherwise they behave pretty similarly in terms of temperature, ester profile etc.

But yes, these insights have encouraged people to try a few things that they wouldn't have otherwise, particularly over on the warm-fermented lager thread where in the last 18 months WLP800 has become one of the favourites for such beers as a direct result of this kind of work. Also I've been doing a bit of work on relatives of T-58 for biotransformation.

Although I suspect a lot of the people who might otherwise have done such experiments are all too busy playing with kveik at the moment...
 

Northern_Brewer

British - apparently some US company stole my name
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
2,128
Location
UK
So I have managed to get the sppIDer program set up with the genome base data and ran some of the sequence reads through it, managed to get a couple of results, not that it means that much as they've already been classified.
Good stuff. It does mean something, as there was a question mark whether the fact that eg WLP029 had been placed by White Labs on their main cerevisiae family tree meant that this new data was just picking up a small exchange of eubayanus DNA, but this looks like a full-blown hybrid. So a kolsch yeast is actually a lager yeast! I'd love to know what Gallone/White Labs sequenced though - are we looking at a mixed culture, did they just sequence the cerevisiae part of the genome, or what?

I guess exactly the same could be said of 1187 if you've got time to do it? WLP515 would also be interesting.

I've also always been curious about the Mixed group in Gallone, they've always been a bit vague about genome structure there and I've not seen any detail elsewhere. Does eg Windsor have any signs of foreign DNA?

The other useful thing you can presumably do with sppIDer would be to distinguish low-temperature Saaz lager strains from high temperature Frohberg strains. Something like WLP850 Copenhagen should be Saaz (2/3 eubayanus, 1/3 cerevisiae) and WLP830 German should be Frohberg (1:1 eubayanus:cerevisiae). If you can distinguish those then it would be interesting to see what the other lager strains show up as.
 

Northern_Brewer

British - apparently some US company stole my name
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
2,128
Location
UK
the only correct general terms now are species S. pastorianus and S. cerevisiae
But what about S. carlsbergensis? :)

Personally I think there was a pretty good case for calling Saaz carlsbergensis and Frohberg pastorianus, but now that people like Suregork are making new cerevisiae/eubayanus hybrids, I suspect it's easier to just lump them all into pastorianus to stop our heads hurting.
 

suregork

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
87
Reaction score
105
Location
Helsinki, Finland
I've downloaded all the data for all the WLP, Wyeast, Fermentis and Lallemand strains and have them running through my pipeline. Creating a list of Saaz and Frohberg lager strains is on my list of things to do (should be ready tomorrow). An updated family tree should be ready during the weekend maybe? I'm a bit hesitant to release too much of the results though, as apparently this data is from an unreleased paper. I don't want to step on their toes and steal their thunder :)
 

Miraculix

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
3,273
Reaction score
1,838
Location
Bremen
I've downloaded all the data for all the WLP, Wyeast, Fermentis and Lallemand strains and have them running through my pipeline. Creating a list of Saaz and Frohberg lager strains is on my list of things to do (should be ready tomorrow). An updated family tree should be ready during the weekend maybe? I'm a bit hesitant to release too much of the results though, as apparently this data is from an unreleased paper. I don't want to step on their toes and steal their thunder :)
Just asking them might be a good idea. Maybe they don't mind.
 

Vale71

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2018
Messages
2,640
Reaction score
1,333
I think you might want to check that... :)

Oh, and bottom/top fermenting is another of those panda classifications. Although skimming open fermenters selected strongly for ale strains that float, the move to conicals selected for ale strains that sink, so a lot of ale strains look like bottom fermenters these days, it seems to be a pretty mutable characteristic that is strongly selected for depending on fermenter type.
You're absolutely right, I've managed to confuse myself too..

I'm aware of the unsuitability of the bottom/top cropping definition in light of modern practices and that's why I was hesitant to use it.
 

lump42

The Lajestic Vantrashell of Lob
HBT Supporter
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
1,084
Reaction score
639
Location
Bluegrass Region
Number 1 - it's just really interesting, and can also illuminate some of the history of how yeast got swapped around etc.

Number 2 - you have to be a bit wary of relationships - nobody is more closely related to you than your parents, but one of them has very different lumps and bumps to you! But at the same time thee family trees can help see things that aren't immediately obvious - for instance T-58 looks like a POF+ version of S-33/Windsor, the small POF gene cassette produces a very obvious change in flavour, but otherwise they behave pretty similarly in terms of temperature, ester profile etc.

But yes, these insights have encouraged people to try a few things that they wouldn't have otherwise, particularly over on the warm-fermented lager thread where in the last 18 months WLP800 has become one of the favourites for such beers as a direct result of this kind of work. Also I've been doing a bit of work on relatives of T-58 for biotransformation.

Although I suspect a lot of the people who might otherwise have done such experiments are all too busy playing with kveik at the moment...
Thanks, that clears up the reasoning. :mug:
 
OP
sykesey

sykesey

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
40
Reaction score
33
The other useful thing you can presumably do with sppIDer would be to distinguish low-temperature Saaz lager strains from high temperature Frohberg strains. Something like WLP850 Copenhagen should be Saaz (2/3 eubayanus, 1/3 cerevisiae) and WLP830 German should be Frohberg (1:1 eubayanus:cerevisiae). If you can distinguish those then it would be interesting to see what the other lager strains show up as.
I don't know how well it can pick that up, and I think with short sequence reads like this rather than full genome sequencing that might be hard. There's probably another way to do it, which I'm sure people smarter than me are all over :) My experience is some biochem in uni about 20 years ago and plenty of IT since then so setting up the tool is easy, but building the process chain and understanding the results to get further than that is something I need to spend more time with.

but when i get a chance i'll run 515 and 1187 through it, or just wait for the paper to come out and it should have something similar.

The lager/ale differences remind me of a German term, Obergäriges Lagerbier, or simply "top-fermenting lager beer" ... to a lot germans it probably made no real distinction between ale and lager it was all about the process and result
 
Last edited:
OP
sykesey

sykesey

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
40
Reaction score
33
I've downloaded all the data for all the WLP, Wyeast, Fermentis and Lallemand strains and have them running through my pipeline. Creating a list of Saaz and Frohberg lager strains is on my list of things to do (should be ready tomorrow). An updated family tree should be ready during the weekend maybe? I'm a bit hesitant to release too much of the results though, as apparently this data is from an unreleased paper. I don't want to step on their toes and steal their thunder :)
Yeah, good call. It's by chance I found them (oops) so there's something to be said for a little discretion on findings yet, and they'll need to have a chance to peer review. Hopefully it's soon though so we can get an updated family tree, which is going to be super interesting. So interesting in fact I want to learn how to set up my own pipeline to do my own freebayes+parsnp tree from the data to keep secret :)
 

brewbama

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
3,527
Reaction score
2,033
I've downloaded all the data for all the WLP, Wyeast, Fermentis and Lallemand strains and have them running through my pipeline. Creating a list of Saaz and Frohberg lager strains is on my list of things to do (should be ready tomorrow). An updated family tree should be ready during the weekend maybe? I'm a bit hesitant to release too much of the results though, as apparently this data is from an unreleased paper. I don't want to step on their toes and steal their thunder :)
This will be interesting to see when the time is right.
 

Northern_Brewer

British - apparently some US company stole my name
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
2,128
Location
UK
I'm a bit hesitant to release too much of the results though, as apparently this data is from an unreleased paper. I don't want to step on their toes and steal their thunder :)
Of course, and talking to them is the way to handle it. I guess I'd see it as 5 levels

1) Correcting mistakes on the existing ale tree
2a) Adding new homebrew strains to the ale tree
2b) Adding ale strains that aren't readily available to homebrewers
3a) Simple Saaz/Frohberg typing of homebrew lager strains
3b) S/F typing of lager strains not readily available to homebrewers
4) Adding lager genomes to the cerevisiae family tree
5) More detailed analysis of genomic structure of hybrids

From our point of view, we're primarily interested in 1, 2a, 3a and to some extent 4. They seem to be primarily interested in 5, althought the other stuff all comes out of their work. So there seems to be room for some flexibility, at the very least 1 and hopefully 3 given that 3 should be doable by anyone with sppIDer once they release the sequences (and in theory 3a could be done by anyone via PCR after a trip to LHBS). I guess we see what they say.
 

Northern_Brewer

British - apparently some US company stole my name
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
2,128
Location
UK
I don't know how well it can pick that up, and I think with short sequence reads like this rather than full genome sequencing that might be hard.
Well that was why I suggested doing it with what are hopefully clear-cut cases to see if it works or not, and then moving on to other strains. With biology you often just have to give it a go and see what comes out.
 
OP
sykesey

sykesey

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
40
Reaction score
33
Well that was why I suggested doing it with what are hopefully clear-cut cases to see if it works or not, and then moving on to other strains. With biology you often just have to give it a go and see what comes out.
So I just read the paper again and it does mention they used it to differentiate saaz vs frohberg via analysing where things landed to determine the ploidy. I'm going to get the 515 databank and try and align the sequences and merge to get a clearer picture than just taking the largest sequence read through the process, if that fails i'll just run it with the biggest sequence read.

"To test sppIDer’s ability to delineate hybrids, we used short-read data from two S. cerevisiae × S. eubayanus lager yeast lineages, Saaz (strain CBS1503) and Frohberg (strain W34/70). The known parentage of S. cerevisiae and S. eubayanus was statistically confirmed, and only these genomes produced positive residuals from χ2 tests of the mapped data (supplementary table S1, Supplementary Material online). By analyzing the distribution of coverage, we binned regions of the genomes with similar coverages, drawing boundaries based on local minima and maxima. These coverage bins roughly corresponded to the known relative ploidies and rearrangements (supplementary fig. S1c and d, Supplementary Material online) (supplementary fig. S1c, Supplementary Material online)."

here's the image , you can get it from the paper but this is the one in question. c) on the left shows the saaz, so same distribution thereabouts on the left hand violin plot and coverage map to show roughly same distribution of S.cer vs S.eub, d) on the right shows the frohberg, 2x as much S.eub vs S.cer material.

Screen Shot 2019-09-13 at 8.35.47 am.png
 
OP
sykesey

sykesey

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
40
Reaction score
33
Mixed success so far, I need to learn how to align + merge SRA's into a format that the process can use but I don't think its fully necessary. I'll probably just batch up a few analyses over the weekend and see what we get. The cloud server i'm running this on is reasonably powerful but has limited space and resources so I need to probably limit it to a few target strains of interest.
 

Northern_Brewer

British - apparently some US company stole my name
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
2,128
Location
UK
Before we get too carried away with idea that WLP838 is an ale and Wyeast 1187 is a lager, we should perhaps also consider the idea that they've just got mixed up. It certainly happened in a couple of cases with the 1002 genomes from Strasbourg, it's tough managing this number of samples and mixups do happen. Remember this is provisional data at this stage.
 
OP
sykesey

sykesey

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
40
Reaction score
33
Indeed. Not worth getting too heavily invested in the results right now with provisional data.

I'm just glad there's more evidence that WLP800 is an ale yeast and I have another potential yeast to brew Kölsch with!
 

Northern_Brewer

British - apparently some US company stole my name
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
2,128
Location
UK
Paper is out in Nature Ecology & Evolution :
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-019-0998-8

For those without access there's a press release here:
"By sequencing the genomes of more than 100 hybrid yeasts, the researchers discovered seven distinct combinations of yeast species, many of them tied to unique fermented beverages. Some yeasts were hybrids of as many as four species....Most hybrids had just two parent species, but some had three or even four parents. The current study doubled the number of known triple- and quadruple-hybrids. Some hybrids were preferentially found in cold-fermented wine and Belgian style beers, while others came from champagne and cider. Most were isolated from lager beers...Saaz and Frohberg, lost the (POF) genes in different ways. While Frohberg yeasts retain a broken version of a key gene, Saaz yeasts have lost both essential genes entirely....

The researchers found that all of the S. cerevisiae parents stemmed from three major, previously domesticated lineages responsible for brewing ale or wine. The hybrids developed when these domesticated strains met up with their wild cousins, all of which came from the Northern Hemisphere. While the domesticated yeasts were already adapted for successful fermentation — such as in their ability to completely digest common sugars — the wild partners offered their own contributions.

Most notably, the vast majority of the hybrids inherited their mitochondrial genome — a small snippet of DNA that drives energy generation in the cell — from their wild yeast parents, rather than from domesticated S. cerevisiae. Recent work out of the Hittinger lab has shown that the wild mitochondrial genomes permit yeasts to ferment at cold temperatures, like those favored for brewing lager...

One set of hybrids had no S. cerevisiae parent at all. These yeasts were combinations of the closely related species S. eubayanus and S. uvarum. They were isolated from the most diverse sources — strains were found in wine, cider, beer, fruit and the environment...

“We’ve learned more about how lager yeasts dispensed with undesirable aromas,” says Hittinger. “Now we’re starting to think more about the genetic basis of the flavors that you want present in a beer.”"
 
OP
sykesey

sykesey

Active Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
40
Reaction score
33
Yay! the paper was released! Been waiting ages.

Still need a bit of time to dissect all the info, but in the supplementary data there's a lot of evidence that most commercial lager strains are Frohberg, even the Czech ones, corresponding to some of the analysis we did.

Hopefully I have time to look through it all later this week and work out what's of interest, and suregork can get an updated family tree out soon :)
 

Northern_Brewer

British - apparently some US company stole my name
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
2,128
Location
UK
Just looking at some of their spreadsheets on the Nature site - I'm intrigued which of the Sheffield breweries (presumably either Wards or Stones, the former is suspected of having "interesting" yeast) has those eubayanus x uvarum and 4-way hybrids. I'm guessing the British stout that produced NCYC 1063/4 is most likely to be Courage RIS as there weren't many other notable ones at the time they were deposited (1958) other than perhaps Mackeson, although many UK breweries produced stout alongside their main brews and to be fair the NCYC themselves describe them as ale/stout production strains.

Vin7 is an interesting Stellenbosch wine strain that Scott Janish has been experimenting with as it is meant to be particularly good at releasing thiols. Is that a general property of kud hybrids, do Abbaye/WLP500/1214 do it too?

cerevisiae (50-60%) x eubayanus (40-50%) - Frohberg, all eubayanus mitochondria
WLP029 Kolsch, WLP051 California V, WLP515 Antwerp, WY1187 Ringwood(!!!),
SafLager-023,
WLP802 Budejovice, WLP810 San Francisco, WLP815 Belgian Lager, WLP820 Oktoberfest, WLP830 German Lager, WLP833 German Bock, WLP840 American, WLP862 Cry Havoc, WLP920 Old Bavarian, WLP940 Mexican,
WY2000 Budvar, WY2001 Urquell H-strain, WY2007 Pilsen, WY2035 American, WY2042 Danish (!), WY2112 Californian, 2xWY2124 Bohemian, 2xWY2206 Bavarian, WY2278 Czech, WY2308 Munich

DBVPG6283(yHCT111, Copenhagen beer !!), CBS1260(yHCT79 unknown beer), CBS1486(yHCT80 unknown beer), NA(yHCT145 Lager, New Glarus), NA(yHDD49 Lager, Middleton, WI), NRRL Y-48766(yHQL582 beechwood chip, Anheuser-Busch, St. Louis), CIBART79(yHCT133 Commercial beer)

Saaz : NRRL Y-12693(FM471, Copenhagen beer), CBS1538nt(yHCT83 unknown beer)

They have two 34/70 sequences that are Frohberg and one from Okuno et al that is a Saaz - presumably a mixup.

cerevisiae (45%) x eubayanus (45%) x uvarum (10%), uvarum mitochondria
WLP351, Muri
NRRL Y-48763(unknown lager 50%/1.3%/48.8%)

cerevisiae (67%-98.6%) x kudriavzevii
, most kudriavzevii mitochondria
Anchor Oenology NT50 (98.6%, cerevisiae mitochondria), ABMauri EP2 (90%, cerevisiae mitochondria), YNN48(FM64, German wine 86%), Vin7 (67%), NA (Belgian beer brewed in New Glarus WI), LallemandAbbaye , WLP500 (x2), WY1214 (last four all 77-81%)

eubayanus x uvarum
NRRL Y-672(yHQL559 - Louisville KY distillery, 45% eubayanus)
NRRL Y-12624(FM473, South Manchuria Railway Company, China), DBVPG6282(yHCT110, London ON - Labatt????), NRRL Y-587(yHQL556, Schlitz beer), NRRL Y-648(yHQL558, unknown lager), NRRL Y-1566(yHQL566, Japan brewery)
NRRL Y-1901(yHQL567), NRRL Y-1906(yHQL569), NRRL Y-1910(yHQL581 all 3 from Sheffield UK beer)

cerevisiae x kudriavzevii x eubayanus x uvarum
NRRL Y-1531(yHQL563, UK ale), NRRL Y-1905(yHQL568 Sheffield UK beer)

cerevisiae
Muntons,
BelleSaison, LondonESB, Munich, Nottingham, Nottingham, Windsor,
S-33, SafaleK-97, SafaleS-04, SafaleS-05, T-58, US-05, WB-06,
WLP001, WLP002, WLP004, WLP007, WLP013, WLP023, WLP028, WLP090, WLP099, WLP300, WLP320, WLP380, WLP400, WLP510, WLP530B, WLP545, WLP550, WLP565, WLP566, WLP570, WLP644, WLP715, WLP775, WLP800, WLP838,
WY1007, WY1026, WY1028, WY1028, WY1098, WY1272, WY1318, WY1388, WY1728, WY1792, WY1968, WY2565, WY3068, WY3463, WY3522, WY3724, WY3787, WY3787, WY4766
CoteDesBlancs, EC1118, PasteurRed, YNN49(FM65, Bordeaux wine)
Turbo Super Yeast, Liquor Quik Whisky Pure - both distilling
AnchorBrewersYeast, NPC-HighfoamSuperbrew(both South African bakers yeasts)
NCYC1063(yHQL579 British stout), NCYC1064(yHQL577 British stout), NA(yHQL578 Irish stout),
NA(yHAB176 Pale Ale, Amana IA) - Millstream?
NA(yHAB174 Belgian Tripel Everett WA) - Scuttlebutt Tripel 7?
blueberryAle(yHKS338) - Tahquamenon Falls Brewery & Pub Blueberry Ale?
Belgian(yHCT146), Green(yHCT143), Weiss(yHCT147), White(yHCT144) - all New Glarus
 
Top