## 4 Discussion  
Although the autochthonous (F-8 and F-78) and commercial (D-80) yeast strains belong to the same species of _Saccharomyces cerevisiae_, the dynamics of alcoholic fermentation presented in Figures 1 and 2 and Table 3 confirm the findings of [PERSON] et al. where autochthonous yeast strains had the ability for better adaptation in grape must in comparison to the commercial yeast strains. According to the findings of [PERSON] et al. (2011) [26], when commercial and wild strains were inoculated at the same rate, the wild strains were dominant not only in the fermentation in the cellar, but also in the laboratory assays. In addition, the wild strains, when reaching 50% of composition in the vinification vat, improved their performance under controlled conditions [26]. In fact, autochthonous strains in distinct matrixes often show higher functional and technological performance than allochthonous strains due to its inherent better adaptability to the original raw materials, which justifies the microbial prospection toward their potential use in food processing systems. In addition, dynamics of alcoholic fermentation depends on the presence of tannins and fermentation activators. Such a correlation was observed in the present studies when it was observed that the same yeast fermentation under the same winemaking conditions resulted in distinct profiles of fermentation curves (i.e., the same yeast fermentation under the same winemaking conditions resulted in different shapes of fermentation curves (Figures 1 and 2)). According to the findings of [PERSON] et al. (2014) [27], the fermentation activity of individual yeast strains depends of abiotic factors (pH, temperature, ethanol, osmotic pressure, nitrogen, etc.) and simultaneously in biotic factors (microorganisms, killer factors, grape variety, etc.). Moreover, there is a trend to imply co-inoculation with different yeast strains (i.e., the use of consortia of yeast strains) in order to reach improved characteristics of wines and achieved organoleptic complexity [27]. As noted, in Vranec wines, substantial changes in the shape of the curves was evident from the 3 rd to 7 th days of fermentation, while in Cabernet Sauvignon wines, it occurred from the 3 rd to 9 th days fermentation (Figures 1 and 2 and Table 3) in favor of autochthonous yeast strain F-78. According to [PERSON] et al. (2014) [28], the evolution of yeast populations during controlled fermentation of Chardonnay musts in two Italian wineries depended on the presence of autochthonous yeast strains. Specifically, in the first winery, where the oenologist carefully managed only one of three starter cultures and did not carry out any spontaneous fermentation, the commercial yeast strain always mastered the process; conversely, in the second winery, where the oenologist simultaneously performed spontaneous fermentation, the yeast starter culture did never take over the microbial growth dominance (despite staying viable over the fermentation) and a continuous succession of distinct autochthonous _Saccharomyces cerevisiae_, _Pichia membranifaciens_, and _Hansenispora vinae_ strains dominated the fermentation without one never prevailed on the other autochthonous strains [29]. Furthermore, sensitivity/vulnerability of yeast strains to ethanol toxicity is also a very well-known condition, which can affect the microbial dynamics of fermentations, since the ethanol inhibits sugar metabolic pathways of the yeasts. The tolerance of yeast strains to the toxicity of ethanol is strongly dependent on the temperature and leads to the conclusion that some yeast strains have more aptitude to finish fermentations under lower temperatures [30; 31; 32]. Results displayed in the current research (Table 4) showed that the influence of yeast strains is better and more intensively expressed based on the total phenolic content of wines in comparison to the oenochemical parameters.