Pure wine vs natural wine

The chemistry of wine is particularly complex due to biochemical and chemical interactions that significantly modify its organoleptic characteristics and stability over time. Aging on lees is a well-known practice during which various compounds are released, ensuring wines oxidative stability and its overall sensory quality [1,2].

The gustatory balance of wines relies on sweetness, bitterness and sourness. In dry wines, sweetness does not result from the presence of residual sugar as in sweet wines, but is due to other non-volatile compounds. Such taste-active compounds are released during winemaking, by grapes, yeasts or oak wood and belong numerous chemical families [1]. Beyond this diversity, stereochemistry of molecules can also influence their sensory properties [2]. However, the molecular determinants associated with this taste have only been partially elucidated. Astilbin (2R, 3R) was recently reported to contribute to wine sweetness [3]. As its aglycon contains two stereogenic centers, three other stereoisomers may be present: neoisoastilbin (2S, 3R), isoastilbin (2R, 3S), and neoastilbin (2S, 3S). These compounds have already been observed in natural products, but never in wine. This work aimed at assaying their presence for the first time in wines as well as their taste properties.The isomers were synthesized from astilbin and purified by semi-preparative HPLC.

Malolactic fermentation (MLF) is a secondary wine fermentation conducted by lactic acid bacteria (LAB). This fermentation is important in winemaking as it deacidifies the wine, converting L-malic acid into L-lactic acid and carbon dioxide, and it contributes to microbial stability. Wine pH is highly selective, and at pH below 3.5 generally only strains of O. oeni can survive and express malolactic activity, while under more favorable growth conditions above pH 3.5, species of Lactobacillus and Pediococcus may conduct the MLF. Among the LAB species Lactiplantibacillus plantarum strains have shown most interesting results under hot climate conditions, not only for their capacity to induce MLF, but also for their homo-fermentative properties towards hexose sugars, which makes them suitable for induction of MLF in high pH and high alcohol wines, when inoculated at the beginning of alcoholic fermentation.

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.

Understanding the physiological and molecular bases of grapevine responses to mild to moderate water deficits is fundamental to optimize vineyard irrigation management and identify the most suitable varieties. In Mediterranean regions, the higher frequency of heat waves and droughts highlights the importance of precision irrigation to meet vine water demands and demonstrates the necessity for a deeper understanding of the different physiological responses among varieties under water stress. In this context, previous reports show an interplay between stomatal regulation of transpiration and changes in leaf hydraulic conductivity, also with the involvement of aquaporins (AQPs), particularly under water stress. However, how those signaling mechanisms are regulated in different grapevine varieties along phenological phases is unclear.