Increasing sulphite formation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by overexpression of MET14 and SSU1
Abstract
Saccharomyces cerevisiae produces sulphite as an intermediate product during the assimilatory reduction of sulphate to sulphide. Three genes, MET3 , MET14 and MET16 , are essential for this reduction. We investigated the level of transcription of these genes in strains of S. cerevisiae with high, medium and low sulphite formation. The level of MET14 ‐ and MET16 ‐mRNA varied with sulphite production, whereas the level of MET3 ‐mRNA was very weak in almost all strains. We also analysed the effect of overexpression of MET14 and MET16 on sulphite formation. Two strains with low sulphite production were transformed with high‐copy plasmids containing either or both MET14 and MET16 . The overexpression of these two genes leads to a two‐ to three‐fold sulphite formation. In addition, inactivation of MET10 , encoding a subunit of the sulphite reductase, also leads to a distinct increase in sulphite formation; however, the cells became methionine auxotroph. The overexpression of SSU1 , a gene encoding a putative sulphite pump, yields a slight increase in sulphite accumulation, whereas overexpression of SSU1 , together with MET14 , increases sulphite formation up to 10‐fold. Furthermore, sulphite formation strongly depends on growth conditions, e.g. yeast transformants growing in wort produce much higher amounts of sulphite when compared to growth in minimal media. The addition of glucose can also increase the sulphite formation in strains overexpressing MET14 and/or SSU1 under oxygen‐limiting conditions, while the addition of glucose has no significant effect under aerobic conditions. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Overexpression of MET14 and SSU1 increases sulfite formation.
“Overexpression of the two genes MET14 and SSU1 have been shown to increase the formation of sulfite (Donalies and Stahl 2002).”
From Yeast and bacterial modulation of wine aroma and flavour (2005) · cites this paper as Donalies and Stahl 2002
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Yeast and bacterial modulation of wine aroma and flavour
SWIEGERS, J. H., BARTOWSKY, E. J., HENSCHKE, P. A., & PRETORIUS, I. S. (2005) · Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research · doi:10.1111/j.1755-0238.2005.tb00285.x · Cited by 1,216 · see citing works
- Authors
- Donalies, U. E. B., & Stahl, U.
- Affiliations
- Technische Universität Berlin (DE)
- Venue
- Yeast
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-02-26
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 475-484
- ISSN
- 0749-503X (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0061
- OpenAlex
- W1488033661
- Cited by
- 75
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 8 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 0.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Yeast (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Fermentation and Sensory Analysis
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nitrogen and Sulfur Effects on Brassica
- Keywords
- Saccharomyces cerevisiae, sulfate assimilation, gene overexpression, methionine auxotrophy, oxygen limitation, glucose
- MeSH terms
- Culture Media, Fungal Proteins, Genes, Fungal, Glucose, Membrane Proteins, Oxidation-Reduction, Oxidoreductases, Plasmids, RNA, Messenger, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Sulfate Adenylyltransferase, Sulfites, Transformation, Genetic, Blotting, Northern, Open Reading Frames, Phosphotransferases (Alcohol Group Acceptor), Anion Transport Proteins, Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins, Oxidoreductases Acting on Sulfur Group Donors
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review