The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Mutual antagonism among killer yeasts: competition between Kl and K2 killers and a novel cDNA-based K1-K2 killer strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Abstract
Mutually antagonistic K1 and K2 killer strains compete when mixed and serially subcultured. At pH 4.6, where the K1 killer toxin is more stable in vitro, the K1 strain outcompeted the K2 strains at both 18 and 30 °C. At pH 4.0, closer to the in vitro pH optimum of the K2 killer toxin, the K1 strain again predominated at 18 °C, but at 30 °C the K2 strains became the sole cell type on subculture. To show more clearly that these results were dependent upon the respective killer toxins, control experiments were conducted with isogenic, nonkiller strains cured of the dsRNA-based killer virions. Such nonkiller strains were unable to compete with antagonistic killers under conditions where their isogenic killer parents could, strongly suggesting that the killer phenotype was important in these competitions. Double K1–K2 killer strains cannot stably exist, as their dsRNA genomes compete at a replicative level. Using recombinant DNA methodology, a stable K1–K2 killer strain was constructed. This strain outcompeted both K1 and K2 killers when serially subcultured under conditions where either the K1 or the K2 strains would normally predominate in mixed cultures. Such a double killer may be useful in commercial fermentations, where there is a risk of contamination by killer yeasts.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
Besides the engineering examples, only killer toxin activity has been extensively studied and transferred to new strains, mainly for biotechnological applications.
“Besides this, only killer toxin activity has been extensively studied and transferred to new strains; mainly for biotechnological applications (Bajaj and Sharma 2010; Bussey et al. 1988; Schmitt and Schernikau 1997).”
From Biocontrol yeasts: mechanisms and applications (2019) · cites this paper as Bussey et al. 1988
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Biocontrol yeasts: mechanisms and applications
Freimoser, F. M., Rueda-Mejia, M. P., Tilocca, B., & Migheli, Q. (2019) · World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s11274-019-2728-4 · Cited by 462
Metadata
- Authors
- Bussey, H., Vernet, T., & Sdicu, A.-M.
- Affiliations
- McGill University (CA)
- ORCID
- Vernet, Thierry
- Venue
- Canadian Journal of Microbiology
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 1988-01-01
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 38-44
- ISSN
- 0008-4166 (ISSN-L)
- 1480-3275
- OpenAlex
- W2072450861
- Cited by
- 36
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Canadian Journal of Microbiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Virology › Plant and Fungal Interactions Research
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Yeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
- Keywords
- killer yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, killer toxin, interspecific competition, mutual antagonism, pH optimum, temperature effects, serial subculture
- MeSH terms
- DNA, DNA, Recombinant, Genes, Fungal, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Mycotoxins, Phenotype, Plasmids, RNA, Double-Stranded, RNA, Fungal, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Transformation, Genetic
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