IVAS 2022 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 IVAS 9 IVAS 2022 9 Composition and molar mass distribution of different must and wine colloids

Composition and molar mass distribution of different must and wine colloids

Abstract

A major problem for winemakers is the formation of proteinaceous haze after bottling. Although the exact mechanisms remain unclear, this haze is formed by unfolding and agglomeration of grape proteins, being additionally influenced by numerous further factors. For instance, increased levels of polyphenols and sulfate ions, high pH and ionic strength, and increased storage temperatures have been discussed to promote haze formation. In contrast, organic acids and polysaccharides appear to inhibit protein agglomeration (Albuquerque et al. 2021). To avoid haze formation, winemakers use bentonite to reduce protein levels in the wine before bottling. However, the bentonite treatment imposes negative side effects such as losses in wine quantity and quality, as well as costs of bentonite waste disposal (van Sluyter et al. 2015). To better understand haze formation and to find alternative procedures for protein removal e.g. by enzymatic treatments, detailed insights into the composition of the wine colloids might be helpful.
Prior to characterization, colloids were isolated from five different musts (four varieties from five vineyards, three with pectinase treatment) and their corresponding wines by ultrafiltration (10 kDa cut-off) and freeze-drying. Protein and carbohydrate composition were determined after hydrolysis by ion chromatography and high-performance anion exchange chromatography with pulsed amperometric detection (HPAEC-PAD), respectively. Molar mass distribution of colloids was determined by size exclusion chromatography with multi angle light scattering in combination with an UV and RI detector (SEC-UV-MALS-RI).
Colloids were found to contain a wide range of 8.9 to 67.1 g protein and 28.1 to 78.0 g carbohydrates per 100 g dry matter. Thus, protein concentrations in must and wine were been between 0.06 and 0.40 g/L and carbohydrate concentrations between 0.17 and 0.65 g/L. While there were just minor differences in the amino acid composition between the musts and wines, the carbohydrate composition was different in the samples. For instance, arabinose and galactose were the main sugars found in all hydrolyzed must colloids, while galacturonic acid was present in higher amounts in those not treated with pectinase. After fermentation, mannose was found to be the main sugar in hydrolyzed wine colloids. SEC-UV-MALS-RI showed that the colloids contained three main fractions. Two carbohydrate-rich fractions with average molar masses from 931 to 22,617 kDa and from 80 to 495 kDa as well as a proteinaceous fraction with an average molar mass between 16 to 44 kDa.
Our results indicate that colloid concentration and composition in wine is heavily influenced by variety, vineyard and oenological practices. The isolated colloids and the analytical methods will in the future be used to screen for enzyme preparations suitable to degrade proteins in must and wine to avoid haze formation.

References

Albuquerque, Wendell; Seidel, Leif; Zorn, Holger; Will, Frank; Gand, Martin (2021): Haze Formation and the Challenges for Peptidases in Wine Protein Fining. In: Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 69, S. 14402–14414.
van Sluyter, Steven C.; McRae, Jacqui M.; Falconer, Robert J.; Smith, Paul A.; Bacic, Antony; Waters, Elizabeth J.; Marangon, Matteo (2015): Wine Protein Haze: Mechanisms of Formation and Advances in Prevention. In: Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 63 (16), S. 4020–4030.

DOI:

Publication date: June 23, 2022

Issue: IVAS 2022

Type: Poster

Authors

Seidel Leif1, Albuquerque Wendell2, Happel Katharina3, Gand Martin2, Zorn Holger2,3, Schweiggert Ralf1 and Will Frank1

1Department of Beverage Research, Geisenheim University
2Institute of Food Chemistry and Food Biotechnology, Justus Liebig Giessen 
3Fraunhofer Institute for Molecular Biology and Applied Ecology, Giessen, Germany

Contact the author

Keywords

wine colloids, proteins, carbohydrates, molar mass

Tags

IVAS 2022 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Permanent cover cropping with reduced tillage increased resiliency of wine grape vineyards to climate change

Majority of California’s vineyards rely on supplemental irrigation to overcome abiotic stressors. In the context of climate change, increases in growing season temperatures and crop evapotranspiration pose a risk to adaptation of viticulture to climate change. Vineyard cover crops may mitigate soil erosion and preserve water resources; but there is a lack of information on how they contribute to vineyard resiliency under tillage systems. The aim of this study was to identify the optimum combination of cover crop sand tillage without adversely affecting productivity while preserving plant water status. Two experiments in two contrasting climatic regions were conducted with two cover crops, including a permanent short stature grass (P. bulbosa hybrid), barley (Hordeum spp), and resident vegetation under till vs. no-till systems in a Ruby Cabernet (V. vinifera spp.) (Fresno) and a Cabernet Sauvingon (Napa) vineyard. Results indicated that permanent grass under no-till preserved plant available water until E-L stage 17. Consequently, net carbon assimilation of the permanent grass under no-till system was enhanced compared to those with barley and resident vegetation. On the other hand, the barley under no-till system reduced grapevine net carbon assimilation during berry ripening that led to lower content of nonstructural carbohydrates in shoots at dormancy. Components of yield and berry composition including flavonoid profile at either site were not adversely affected by factors studied. Switching to a permanent cover crop under a no-till system also provided a 9% and 3% benefit in cultural practices costs in Fresno and Napa, respectively. The results of this work provides fundamental information to growers in preserving resiliency of vineyard systems in hot and warm climate regions under context of climate change.

Climate ethnography and wine environmental futures

Globalisation and climate change have radically transformed world wine production upsetting the established order of wine ecologies. Ecological risks and the future of traditional agricultural systems are widely debated in anthropology, but very little is understood of the particular challenges posed by climate change to viticulture which is seen by many as the canary in the coalmine of global agriculture. Moreover, wine as a globalised embedded commodity provides a particularly telling example for the study of climate change having already attracted early scientific attention. Studies of climate change in viticulture have focused primarily on the production of systematic models of adaptation and vulnerability, while the human and cultural factors, which are key to adaptation and sustainable futures, are largely missing. Climate experts have been unanimous in recognising the urgent need for a better understanding of the complex dynamics that shape how climate change is experienced and responded to by human systems. Yet this call has not yet been addressed. Climate ethnography, coined by the anthropologist Susan Crate (2011), aims to bridge this growing disjuncture between climate science and everyday life through the exploration of the social meaning of climate change. It seeks to investigate the confrontation of its social salience in different locations and under different environmental guises (Goodman 2018: 340). By understanding how wine producers make sense of the world (and the environment) and act in it, it proposes to focus on the co-production of interdisciplinary knowledge by identifying and foreshadowing problems (Goodman 2018: 342; Goodman & Marshall 2018). It seeks to offer an original, transformative and contrasted perspective to climate change scenarios by investigating human agency -individual or collective- in all its social, political and cultural diversity. An anthropological approach founded on detailed ethnographies of wine production is ideally placed to address economic, social and cultural disruptions caused by the emergence of these new environmental challenges. Indeed, the community of experts in environmental change have recently called for research that will encompass the human dimension and for more broad-based, integrated through interdisciplinarity, useful knowledge (Castree & al 2014). My paper seeks to engage with climate ethnography and discuss what it brings to the study of wine environmental futures while exploring the limitations of the anthropological environmental approach.

Amino nitrogen content in grapes: the impact of crop limitation

As an essential element for grapevine development and yield, nitrogen is also involved in the winemaking process and largely affects wine composition. Grape must amino nitrogen deficiency affects the alcoholic fermentation kinetics and alters the development of wine aroma precursors. It is therefore essential to control and optimize nitrogen use efficiency by the plant to guarantee suitable grape nitrogen composition at harvest. Understanding the impact of environmental conditions and cultural practices on the plant nitrogen metabolism would allow us to better orientate our technical choices with the objective of quality and sustainability (less inputs, higher efficiency). This trial focuses on the impact of crop limitation – that is a common practice in European viticulture – on nitrogen distribution in the plant and particularly on grape nitrogen composition. A wide gradient of crop load was set up in a homogeneous plot of Chasselas (Vitis vinifera) in the experimental vineyard of Agroscope, Switzerland. Dry weight and nitrogen dynamics were monitored in the roots, trunk, canopy and grapes, during two consecutive years, using a 15N-labeling method. Grape amino nitrogen content was assessed in both years, at veraison and at harvest. The close relationship between fruits and roots in the maintenance of plant nitrogen balance was highlighted. Interestingly, grape nitrogen concentration remained unchanged regardless of crop load to the detriment of the growth and nitrogen content of the roots. Meanwhile, the size and the nitrogen concentration of the canopy were not affected. Leaf gas exchange rates were reduced in response to lower yield conditions, reducing carbon and nitrogen assimilation and increasing intrinsic water use efficiency. The must amino nitrogen profiles could be discriminated as a function of crop load. These findings demonstrate the impact of plant balance on grape nitrogen composition and contribute to the improvement of predictive models and sustainable cultural practices in perennial crops.

Deconstructing the soil component of terroir: from controversy to consensus

Wine terroir describes the collectively recognized relation between a geographical area and the distinctive organoleptic characteristics of the wines produced in it. The overriding objective in terroir studies is therefore to provide scientific proof relating the properties of terroir components to wine quality and typicity. In scientific circles, the role of climate (macro-, meso- and micro-) on grape and wine characteristics is well documented and accepted as the most critical. Moreover, there has been increasing interest in recent years about new elements with possible importance in shaping wine terroir like berry/leaf/soil microbiology or even aromatic plants in proximity to the vineyard conferring flavors to the grapes. However, the actual effect of these factors is also dependent on complex interactions with plant material (variety/clone, rootstock, vine age) and with human factors.
The contribution of soil, although a fundamental component of terroir and extremely popular among wine enthusiasts, remains a much-debated issue among researchers. The role of geology is probably the one mostly associated by consumers with the notion of terroir with different parent rocks considered to give birth to different wine styles. However, the relationship between wine properties and the underlying parent material raises a lot of controversy especially regarding the actual existence of rock-derived flavors in the wine (e.g. minerality). As far as the actual soil properties are concerned, the effect of soil physical properties is generally regarded as the most significant (e.g sandy soils being associated with lighter wines while those on clay with colored and tannic ones) mostly through control of water availability which ultimately modifies berry ripening conditions either directly by triggering biosynthetic pathways, or indirectly by altering vigor and yield components. The role of soil chemistry seems to be weakly associated to wine sensory characteristic, although N, K, S and Ca, but also soil pH, are often considered important in the overall soil effect.
Recently, in the light of evidence provided by precision agriculture studies reporting a high variability of vineyard soils, the spatial scale should also be taken into consideration in the evaluation of the soil effects on wines. While it is accepted that soil effects become more significant than climate on a local level, it is not clear whether these micro-variations of vineyard soils are determining in the terroir effect. Moreover, as terroir is not a set of only natural factors, the magnitude of the contribution of human-related factors (irrigation, fertilization, soil management) to the soil effect still remains ambiguous. Lastly, a major shortcoming of the majority of works about soil effects on wine characteristics is the absence of connection with actual vine physiological processes since all soil effects on grape and wine chemistry and sensorial properties are ultimately mediated through vine responses.
This article attempts to breakdown the main soil attributes involved in the terroir effect to suggest an improved understanding about soil’s true contribution to wine sensory characteristics. It is proposed that soil parameters per se are not as significant determining factors in the terroir effect but rather their mutual interactions as well as with other natural and human factors included in the terroir concept. Consequently, similarly to bioclimatic indices, composite soil indices (i.e. soil depth, water holding capacity, fertility, temperature etc), incorporating multiple soil parameters, might provide a more accurate and quantifiable means to assess the relative weight of the soil component in the terroir effect.

Underpinning terroir with data: rethinking the zoning paradigm

Agriculture, natural resource management and the production and sale of products such as wine are increasingly data-driven activities. Thus, the use of remote and proximal crop and soil sensors to aid management decisions is becoming commonplace and ‘Agtech’ is proliferating commercially; mapping, underpinned by geographical information systems and complex methods of spatial analysis, is widely used. Likewise, the chemical and sensory analysis of wines draws on multivariate statistics; the efficient winery intake of grapes, subsequent production of wines and their delivery to markets relies on logistics; whilst the sales and marketing of wines is increasingly driven by artificial intelligence linked to the recorded purchasing behaviour of consumers. In brief, there is data everywhere!

Opinions will vary on whether these developments are a good thing. Those concerned with the ‘mystique’ of wine, or the historical aspects of terroir and its preservation, may find them confronting. In contrast, they offer an opportunity to those interested in the biophysical elements of terroir, and efforts aimed at better understanding how these impact on vineyard performance and the sensory attributes of resultant wines. At the previous Terroir Congress, we demonstrated the potential of analytical methods used at the within-vineyard scale in the development of Precision Viticulture, in contributing to a quantitative understanding of regional terroir. For this conference, we take this approach forward with examples from contrasting locations in both the northern and southern hemispheres. We show how, by focussing on the vineyards within winegrowing regions, as opposed to all of the land within those regions, we might move towards a more robust terroir zoning than one derived from a mixture of history, thematic mapping, heuristics and the whims of marketers. Aside from providing improved understanding by underpinning terroir with data, such methods should also promote improved management of the entire wine value chain.