English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Quantifying the efficiency and biases of forest Saccharomyces sampling strategies

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons134762

Boynton,  Primrose J.
Max Planck Fellow Group Environmental Genomics (Stukenbrock), Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons239859

Landermann,  Doreen
Max Planck Fellow Group Environmental Genomics (Stukenbrock), Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons146855

Stukenbrock,  Eva H.       
Max Planck Fellow Group Environmental Genomics (Stukenbrock), Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)

Fri_Sep_27_17-17-34_CEST_2019.zip
(Supplementary material), 13KB

Citation

Boynton, P. J., Kowallik, V., Landermann, D., & Stukenbrock, E. H. (2019). Quantifying the efficiency and biases of forest Saccharomyces sampling strategies. Yeast, 36(11), 657-668. doi:10.1002/yea.3435.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0004-4C79-0
Abstract
Saccharomyces yeasts are emerging as model organisms for ecology and evolution, and researchers need environmental Saccharomyces isolates to test ecological and evolutionary hypotheses. However, methods for isolating Saccharomyces from nature have not been standardized and isolation methods may influence the genotypes and phenotypes of studied strains. We compared the effectiveness and potential biases of an established enrichment culturing method against a newly developed direct plating method for isolating forest floor Saccharomyces spp. In a European forest, enrichment culturing was both less successful at isolating S. paradoxus per sample collected and less labor intensive per isolated S. paradoxus colony than direct isolation. The two methods sampled similar S. paradoxus diversity: the number of unique genotypes sampled (i.e., genotypic diversity) per S. paradoxus isolate and average growth rates of S. paradoxus isolates did not differ between the two methods, and growth rate variances (i.e., phenotypic diversity) only differed in one of three tested environments. However, enrichment culturing did detect rare S. cerevisiae in the forest habitat, and also found two S. paradoxus isolates with outlier phenotypes. Our results validate the historically common method of using enrichment culturing to isolate representative collections of environmental Saccharomyces. We recommend that researchers choose a Saccharomyces sampling method based on resources available for sampling and isolate screening. Researchers interested in discovering new Saccharomyces phenotypes or rare Saccharomyces species from natural environments may also have more success using enrichment culturing. We include step-by-step sampling protocols in the supplemental materials.