The main objective of this study was to establish if beet sugar produces a different concentration of “fruity” volatile aroma compounds (VOCs), compared to cane sugar when used for second alcoholic fermentation of Auxerrois sparkling wines. Auxerrois base wine from the 2020 vintage was separated into two lots; half was fermented with cane sugar and half with beet sugar (both sucrose products and tested for sugar purity). These sugars were used in yeast acclimation (IOC 2007), and base wines for the second fermentation (12 bottles each). Base wines were manually bottled at the Cool Climate Oenology and Viticulture Institute (CCOVI) research winery. The standard chemical analysis took place at intervals of 0, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks post-bottling. Acidity and pH measurements were carried out by an auto-titrator. Residual Sugar (g/L) (glucose (g/L), fructose (g/L)), YAN (mg N/L), malic acid, and acetic acid (g/L) were analyzed by Megazyme assay kits. parameters were analyzed by Megazyme assay kits. Alcohol (% v/v) was assessed by GC-FID. VOC analysis of base wines, finished sparkling wines, as well as the two sugars in model sparkling wine solutions, was carried out by GC-MS. VOCs included ethyl octanoate, ethyl hexanoate, ethyl butanoate, ethyl decanoate, ethyl-2-methylbutyrate, ethyl-3-methylbutyrate, ethyl 2-methyl propanoate, ethyl 2- hydroxy propanoate, 1-hexanol, 2-phenylethan-1-ol, ethyl acetate, hexyl acetate, isoamyl acetate and 2-phenylethyl acetate.

This paper focuses on how taste in wine (and other foods) changes and the implications of this process
for producers and merchants.
It draws primarily on the changing taste of and taste for champagne in Britain in the 19th century. Between 1850 and 1880 champagne went from a dosage level of around 20% (20 grams sugar / litre) to 0%. Champagne became the ‘dinner wine of the elite – drunk with roast meat and savoury dishes.
Contemporaries accepted that while most people could distinguish the taste of good champagne from that of bad, very few could distinguish very good from good.

Botrytis bunch rot occurrence is the most important limitation for the wine industry in humid environments. The effect of grapevine vegetative growth on bunch rot expression results from direct effects (cluster architecture, nitrogen status among others) and indirect ones (via microclimate). Previous studies of our group showed strong differences in bunch rot incidence between floor management treatments: cover crop (CC) vs weed-free strips under the trellis with herbicide (H). We observed that in some circumstances this reduction in bunch rot incidence occurred without major vine growth differences among treatments. The aim of the present study was to test the general hypothesis that other factors unrelated to grapevine vegetative expression could be more relevant to grapevine susceptibility to bunch rot.

Oenococcus oeni is the main Lactic Acid Bacteria responsible for malolactic fermentation, converting malic acid into lactic acid and carbon dioxide in wines. Following the alcoholic fermentation, this second fermentation ensures a deacidification and remains essential for the release of aromatic notes and the improvement of microbial stability in many wines. Nevertheless, wine is a harsh environment for microbial growth, especially because of its low pH (between 2.9 and 3.6 depending on the type of wine) and nutrient deficiency. In order to maintain homeostasis and ensure viability, O. oeni possesses different cellular mechanisms including organic acid metabolisms which represent also the major pathway to synthetize energy in wine.

In recent years, heightened awareness of the environmental impact has led to sustainability as a key issue for the winemaking sector.