Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 La vinificación de las uvas aromáticas: Moscateles y Malvasías

La vinificación de las uvas aromáticas: Moscateles y Malvasías

Abstract

Las uvas aromáticas se pueden dividir en dos clases, Moscateles y Malvasías, dependiendo del hecho de que el linalol o el geraniol, respectivamente, sean los alcoholes terpénicos monohidroxilados que predominan en el jugo de la uva. Dentro de cada clase existen numerosas subclases que se diferencian por las relaciones entre los otros alcoholes terpénicos mono y dihidroxilados, en forma libre y glicosilada. Otra diferencia entre los Moscateles y las Malvasías es la cantidad de compuestos terpénicos libres del mosto, (los terpenos del hollejo, en las dos clases, se encuentran casi en su totalidad como formas glicosiladas) que puede ser alto como en el caso del Moscatel (linalol, óxido trans piránico del linalol, 2,6-dimetil-3,7-octadien-2,6-diol) o mas bién bajo como en el caso de las Malvasías (geraniol, 2,6-dimetil-3,7-octadien-2,6-diol), mientras que en los hollejos es una característica común a las dos clases la presencia de elevadas cantidades de nerol y de geraniol en forma glicosilada. La composición terpénica de las dos variedades condiciona, además del aroma del vino final, la tecnología de producción.En Italia con el “Moscato bianco” y con las Malvasías (“Malvasia di Casorzo”, “Malvasia di Castelnuovo don Bosco”, esta última en muchos aspectos parecida a los Moscateles, “Brachetto d’Acqui”, que son todas variedades tintas) se preparan dos tipos de vino: uno espumoso y uno no espumoso. El primero se caracteriza por un contenido alcohólico de aproximadamente un 7%y una concentración de azúcares de aproximadamente 70 g/L y el segundo por un grado alcohólico del 5 % y una cantidad de azúcares variable dependiendo de los gustos del productor.En la vinificación del “Moscato bianco” se utiliza solo el mosto (una eventual criomaceración no conlleva un aumento sensible en compuestos terpénicos), que es rico de linalol que no resulta ni absorbido ni metabolizado por las levaduras, mientras que en el caso de las Malvasías tintas, para cuya vinificación se utilizan también los hollejos, el geraniol, practicamente el único alcohol terpénico monohidroxilado presente en el mosto, es metabolizado parcialmente por las levaduras y en parte reducido a citronellol y estos dos compuestos, además del nerol, son transformados en derivados acetilados. Además, a causa de las elevadas cantidades de glucosa que se encuentran en el mosto durante toda la fase de preparación de los vinos de estas variedades, los enzimas glicosidásicos, del mosto o de las levaduras, no pueden transformar en los respectivos aglicones los glicósidos del nerol y del geraniol presentes en el mosto, que quedan, por lo tanto, en forma glicosilada, es decir, no aromática, en el vino final. Las técnicas tradicionales de vinificación establecen, para la extracción del color y de los compuestos terpénicos de los hollejos de las Malvasías tintas, continuos remontados cuando la fermentación todavía no ha empezado, o una fermentación parcial en presencia de los hollejos. Estas dos técnicas son insuficientes sea para extraer la gran cantidad de glicósidos del nerol y del geraniol de los hollejos, sea para hidrolizar los glicósidos terpénicos. En este trabajo se presenta una nueva técnica de vinificación, que favorece la extracción y la hidrólisis de los compuestos terpénicos de los hollejos de las Malvasías tintas y que incrementa sensiblemente la intensidad del aroma y la calidad de los vinos que se obtienen con esta variedad.

DOI:

Publication date: February 24, 2022

Issue: Terroir 2000 

Type: Article

Authors

Rocco Di Stefano*, Emilia García Moruno* and Monica Ribaldone**

*Istituto Sperimentale per l’Enologia, via P. Micca 35 — 14100 Asti (Italia)
**Consorzio per la tutela del Brachetto

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2000

Citation

Related articles…

austrianvineyards.com: online viewer of all designations of Austrian wine

To digitally record and present all the origins of Austrian wines in the same perfect and clear way was the motivation for the Austrian Wine Marketing Board (Austrian Wine) to start with the project in 2018. In June 2021 the results were presented to the public in an online viewer showing all the designations of Austrian wine, available at https://austrianvineyards.com in a largely barrier-free manner. The online viewer provides tailored individual maps fitted to the respective zoom level. The smallest unit of wine-origins in Austria is called Ried and is displayed in a plot-specific manner highlighting areas under vine. Information on the Ried include administrative district, winegrowing municipality, cadastral municipality, large collective vineyard site, specific winegrowing region, generic winegrowing region, winegrowing area and, in many cases, an illustrative picture. Complementary data on the size, elevation (minimum-maximum), orientation (in 8 sectors plus flat) and gradient (minimum, maximum, average) are based on the area under vine according to the EU’s Integrated Administration and Control System. Additional information covers climate data. The diagrams are taken from the monthly breakdown of data in the annals of the Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics, Austria provide a display of values for air temperature, precipitation, and sunshine hours for the reference year and the long-term average. Seasonal aggregated data on temperature, precipitation, and sunshine hours complete the display. Short descriptions with emphasis on geology and soil, field name in historical maps, etymology of the denomination, and main planted variety complements the available information for the main designations in the online viewer. These descriptions are compiled by winegrowers, geologists, historians, and journalists. All the information and data can be extracted to a pdf-file. Printed vineyard maps are also available. Missing content regarding wine origins in Styria will be completed in winter 2021/22.

Rootstock regulation of scion phenotypes: the relationship between rootstock parentage and petiole mineral concentration

Grapevine is grown as a graft since the end of the 19th century. Rootstocks not only provide tolerance to Phylloxera but also ensure the supply of water and mineral nutrients to the scion. Rootstocks are an important mean of adaptation to environmental conditions, because the scion controls the typical features of the grapes and wine. However, among the large diversity of rootstocks worldwide, few of them are commercially used in the vineyard. The aim of this study was to investigate the extent to which rootstocks modify the mineral composition of the petioles of the scion. Vitis vinifera cvs. Cabernet-Sauvignon, Pinot noir, Syrah and Ugni blanc were grafted onto 55 different rootstock genotypes and planted in a vineyard as three replicates of 5 vines. Petioles were collected in the cluster zone with 6 replicates per combination. Petiolar concentrations of 13 mineral elements (N, P, K, S, Mg, Ca, Na, B, Zn, Mn, Fe, Cu, Al) at veraison were determined. Scion, rootstock and the interaction explained the same proportion of the phenotypic variance for most mineral elements. Rootstock genotype showed a significant influence on the petiole mineral element composition. Rootstock effect explained from 7 % for Cu to 25 % for S of the variance. The difference of rootstock conferred mineral status is discussed in relation to vigor and fertility. Rootstocks were also genotyped with 23 microsatellite markers. Data were analysed according to genetic groups in order to determine whether the petiole mineral composition could be related to the genetic parentage of the rootstock. Thanks to a highly powerful design, it is the first time that such a large panel of rootstocks grafted with 4 scions has been studied. These results give the opportunity to better characterize the rootstocks and to enlarge the diversity used in the vineyard.

Rapid damage assessment and grapevine recovery after fire

There is increasing scientific consensus that climate changeis the underlying cause of the prolonged dry and hot conditions that have increased the risk of extreme fire weather in many countries around the world. In December 2019, a bushfire event occurred in the Adelaide Hills, South Australia where 25,000 hectares were burnt and in vineyards and surrounding areas various degrees of scorching and infrastructure damage occurred. The ability to coordinate and plan recovery after a fire event relies on robust and timely data. The current practice for measuring the scale and distribution of fire damage is to walk or drive the vineyard and score individual vines based on visual observation. The process is time consuming, subjective, or semi-quantitative at best. After the December 2019 fires, it took many months to access properties and estimate the area of vineyard damaged. This study compares the rapid assessment and mapping of fire damage using high-resolution satellite imagery with more traditional ground based measures. Satellite imagery tracking vineyard recovery in the season following the bushfire is being correlated to field assessments of vineyard productivity such as canopy health and development, fertility and carbohydrate storage. Canopy health in the seasons following the fires correlated to the severity of the initial fire damage. Severely damaged vines had reduced canopy growth, were infertile or had very low fertility as well as lower carbohydrate levels in buds and canes during dormancy, which reduced productivity in the seasons following the bushfire event. In contrast, vines that received minor damage were able to recover within 1-2 years. Tools that rapidly and affordably capture the extent and severity of damage over large vineyard area will allow producers, government and industry bodies to manage decisions in relation to fire recovery planning, coordination and delivery, improving the efficiency and effectiveness of their response.

Frost risk projections in a changing climate are highly sensitive in time and space to frost modelling approaches

Late spring frost is a major challenge for various winegrowing regions across the world, its occurrence often leading to important yield losses and/or plant failure. Despite a significant increase in minimum temperatures worldwide, the spatial and temporal evolution of spring frost risk under a warmer climate remains largely uncertain. Recent projections of spring frost risk for viticulture in Europe throughout the 21st century show that its evolution strongly depends on the model approach used to simulate budburst. Furthermore, the frost damage modelling methods used in these projections are usually not assessed through comparison to field observations and/or frost damage reports.
The present study aims at comparing frost risk projections simulated using six spring frost models based on two approaches: a) models considering a fixed damage threshold after the predicted budburst date (e.g BRIN, Smoothed-Utah, Growing Degree Days, Fenovitis) and b) models considering a dynamic frost sensitivity threshold based on the predicted grapevine winter/spring dehardening process (e.g. Ferguson model). The capability of each model to simulate an actual frost event for the Vitis vinifera cv. Chadonnay B was previously assessed by comparing simulated cold thermal stress to reports of events with frost damage in Chablis, the northernmost winegrowing region of Burgundy. Models exhibited scores of κ > 0.65 when reproducing the frost/non-frost damage years and an accuracy ranging from 0.82 to 0.90.
Spring frost risk projections throughout the 21st century were performed for all winegrowing subregions of Bourgogne-Franche-Comté under two CMIP5 concentration pathways (4.5 and 8.5) using statistically downscaled 8×8 km daily air temperature and humidity of 13 climate models. Contrasting results with region-specific spring frost risk trends were observed. Three out of five models show a decrease in the frequency of frost years across the whole study area while the other two show an increase that is more or less pronounced depending on winegrowing subregion. Our findings indicate that the lack of accuracy in grapevine budburst and dehardening models makes climate projections of spring frost risk highly uncertain for grapevine cultivation regions.

Making sense of available information for climate change adaptation and building resilience into wine production systems across the world

Effects of climate change on viticulture systems and winemaking processes are being felt across the world. The IPCC 6thAssessment Report concluded widespread and rapid changes have occurred, the scale of recent changes being unprecedented over many centuries to many thousands of years. These changes will continue under all emission scenarios considered, including increases in frequency and intensity of hot extremes, heatwaves, heavy precipitation and droughts. Wine companies need tools and models allowing to peer into the future and identify the moment for intervention and measures for mitigation and/or avoidance. Previously, we presented conceptual guidelines for a 5-stage framework for defining adaptation strategies for wine businesses. That framework allows for direct comparison of different solutions to mitigate perceived climate change risks. Recent global climatic evolution and multiple reports of severe events since then (smoke taint, heatwave and droughts, frost, hail and floods, rising sea levels) imply urgency in providing effective tools to tackle the multiple perceived risks. A coordinated drive towards a higher level of resilience is therefore required. Recent publications such as the Australian Wine Future Climate Atlas and results from projects such as H2020 MED-GOLD inform on expected climate change impacts to the wine sector, foreseeing the climate to expect at regional and vineyard scale in coming decades. We present examples of practical application of the Climate Change Adaptation Framework (CCAF) to impacts affecting wine production in two wine regions: Barossa (Australia) and Douro (Portugal). We demonstrate feasibility of the framework for climate adaptation from available data and tools to estimate historical climate-induced profitability loss, to project it in the future and to identify critical moments when disruptions may occur if timely measures are not implemented. Finally, we discuss adaptation measures and respective timeframes for successful mitigation of disruptive risk while enhancing resilience of wine systems.