In this video recording of the IVES science meeting 2024, Silvina Dayer (PhD in Agronomy, Les Sanctuaires du Mirazur-Groupe Mauro Colagreco, Menton, France) speaks about grapevine drought response to increase vineyard sustainability. This presentation is based on an original article accessible for free on IVES Technical Reviews.

A misconception lingers in the minds of some wine consumers that Champagne wines don’t age. It’s largely a myth, certainly as far as the best cuvees are concerned. Actually, during the so-called autolysis period of time (in the closed bottle, after the “prise de mousse”), complex chemical reactions take place when the wine remains in contact with the dead yeast cells, which progressively bring complex and very much sought-after aromas to champagne. Nevertheless, despite their remarkable impermeability to liquid and air, caps or natural cork stoppers used to cork the bottles are not 100% hermetic with regard to gas transfers. Gas species therefore very slowly diffuse through the cap or cork stopper, along their respective inverse partial pressure. After the “prise de mousse”, because the partial pressure of CO2 in the bottleneck reaches up to 6 bars (at 12 °C), gaseous CO2 progressively diffuse from the bottle to the ambient air
(where the partial pressure of gaseous CO2 is only of order of 0,0004 bar).

Consumers and the wine industry tend to agree on the ability of old vines to produce fruit that allows the production of wine of superior character. However, despite past and ongoing research, objective evidence of this point of view is still debated and studies on robust, specifically dedicated plots are scarce. Thus the impact of grapevine age on berry oenological potential and wine quality remains an open question. To try to objectively address the issue, a unique vineyard was established at Geisenheim University, Germany. It was planted in 1971 with cv. Riesling grafted on 5C Teleki. In 1995 and 2012, several rows were uprooted and replanted with the same rootstock/scion combination, resulting in a vineyard with alternate rows of identical plant material, but with different planting dates. The parameters of technical maturity and grape composition at harvest were analyzed during seasons 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 combining HPLC and enzymatic methods. Separate micro-vinifications were made for each age group and wine composition was analyzed by a combination of 1H-NMR and SPE-GC-MS.

Aged red wines possess phenolic composition very different from young ones due to the transformations among native grape phenolics and the formation of new polymeric polyphenols during aging process.

Wine, a sensitive and intricate agricultural product, is being affected by climate change, which accelerates grapevine phenological stages and alters grape composition and ripening. This influences the synthesis of key aroma compounds, shaping wine’s sensory attributes [1]. The complex aroma profile, resulting from compound interactions, presents a metabolomics challenge to identify these indicators and their environmental change responses, which is being addressed using diverse analytical techniques.