IVAS 2022 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 IVAS 9 IVAS 2022 9 New understanding on sulfites reactivity in wine

New understanding on sulfites reactivity in wine

Abstract

Sulfur dioxide is widely used during winemaking as an antioxidant and antimicrobial agent. Bisulfite (HSO3−), the predominant form of SO2 at wine pH, reacts with several wine components forming sulfonated adducts. Up to now, the compounds that react with SO2 are categorized into strong and weak binders, depending on the stability of the sulfonated adducts that they produce, meaning that compared to the strong binders, weak binders release easily SO2, and under oxidation conditions, they become a pool of free SO2 that will contribute later to wine’s oxidative stability. Carbonyl compounds have been well studied regarding their reaction with SO2, in contrast to peptides and sulfur containing compounds. In this work, 1H NMR spectroscopy has been used in order to monitor directly under wine-like acidic conditions, the kinetics of sulfonation reactions of carbonyls (acetaldehyde and pyruvic acid) and sulfur containing compounds (cysteine and glutathione) with different ratios of SO2 in aerobic and anaerobic conditions. These simulations of wine aging have shown first, that during aging sulfonation reactions to strong carbonyl binders are reversible inducing a decrease on total SO2 level. The dissociation of carbonyls from sulfites is occurred under all conditions. Second, thiol containing compounds appeared to play the key role as metabolic SO2 sink at the late stages of bottle aging. These, until now, unconsidered SO2 binders appeared stables under wine oxidation conditions and represent the truly waste fraction of sulfites during aging. This study puts under reconsideration the way of evaluating the strength of the SO2 binders and could possibly contribute to new strategies for SO2 management in winemaking.

DOI:

Publication date: June 23, 2022

Issue: IVAS 2022

Type: Article

Authors

Tachtalidou Sofia1, Spyros Apostolos2, Heinzmann Silke3, Sok Nicolas1, Noret Laurence1, Denat Frank4, Schmitt-Kopplin Philippe3, Gougeon Régis1 and Nikolantonaki Maria1

 1UMR PAM Université de Bourgogne/Agro Sup Dijon, Institut Universitaire de la Vigne et du Vin, Jules Guyot, 2 Rue Claude Ladrey, 21000, Dijon, France
2NMR Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, University of Crete, P.O. Box 2208, Voutes Campus, 71003, Heraklion, Crete, Greece
4Institut de Chimie Moléculaire de l’Université de Bourgogne, UMR 6302, CNRS, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, 21078 Dijon, France

Contact the author

Keywords

sulfur dioxide, acetaldehyde, glutathione, wine, oxidation

Tags

IVAS 2022 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Optimizing stomatal traits for future climates

Stomatal traits determine grapevine water use, carbon supply, and water stress, which directly impact yield and berry chemistry. Breeding for stomatal traits has the strong potential to improve grapevine performance under future, drier conditions, but the trait values that breeders should target are unknown. We used a functional-structural plant model developed for grapevine (HydroShoot) to determine how stomatal traits impact canopy gas exchange, water potential, and temperature under historical and future conditions in high-quality and hot-climate California wine regions (Napa and the Central Valley). Historical climate (1990-2010) was collected from weather stations and future climate (2079-99) was projected from 4 representative climate models for California, assuming medium- and high-emissions (RCP 4.5 and 8.5). Five trait parameterizations, representing mean and extreme values for the maximum stomatal conductance (gmax) and leaf water potential threshold for stomatal closure (Ψsc), were defined from meta-analyses. Compared to mean trait values, the water-spending extremes (highest gmax or most negative Ysc) had negligible benefits for carbon gain and canopy cooling, but exacerbated vine water use and stress, for both sites and climate scenarios. These traits increased cumulative transpiration by 8 – 17%, changed cumulative carbon gain by -4 – 3%, and reduced minimum water potentials by 10 – 18%. Conversely, the water-saving extremes (lowest gmax or least negative Ψsc) strongly reduced water use and stress, but potentially compromised the carbon supply for ripening. Under RCP 8.5 conditions, these traits reduced transpiration by 22 – 35% and carbon gain by 9 – 16% and increased minimum water potentials by 20 – 28%, compared to mean values. Overall, selecting for more water-saving stomatal traits could improve water-use efficiency and avoid the detrimental effects of highly negative canopy water potentials on yield and quality, but more work is needed to evaluate whether these benefits outweigh the consequences of minor declines in carbon gain for fruit production.

Climate change impacts: a multi-stress issue

With the aim of producing premium wines, it is admitted that moderate environmental stresses may contribute to the accumulation of compounds of interest in grapes. However the ongoing climate change, with the appearance of more limiting conditions of production is a major concern for the wine industry economic. Will it be possible to maintain the vineyards in place, to preserve the current grape varieties and how should we anticipate the adaptation measures to ensure the sustainability of vineyards? In this context, the question of the responses and adaptation of grapevine to abiotic stresses becomes a major scientific issue to tackle. An abiotic stress can be defined as the effect of a specific factor of the physico-chemical environment of the plants (temperature, availability of water and minerals, light, etc.) which reduces growth, and for a crop such as the vine, the yield, the composition of the fruits and the sustainability of the plants. Water stress is in many minds, but a systemic vision is essential for at least two reasons. The first reason is that in natural environments, a single factor is rarely limiting, and plants have to deal with a combination of constraints, as for example heat and drought, both in time and at a given time. The second reason is that plants, including grapevine, have central mechanisms of stress responses, as redox regulatory pathways, that play an important role in adaptation and survival. Here we will review the most recent studies dealing with this issue to provide a better understanding of the grapevine responses to a combination of environmental constraints and of the underlying regulatory pathways, which may be very helpful to design more adapted solutions to cope with climate change.

Soil, vine, climate change – what is observed – what is expected

To evaluate the current and future impact of climate change on Viticulture requires an integrated view on a complex interacting system within the soil-plant-atmospheric continuum under continuous change. Aside of the globally observed increase in temperature in basically all viticulture regions for at least four decades, we observe several clear trends at the regional level in the ratio of precipitation to potential evapotranspiration. Additionally the recently published 6th assessment report of the IPCC (The physical science basis) shows case-dependent further expected shifts in climate patterns which will have substantial impacts on the way we will conduct viticulture in the decades to come.
Looking beyond climate developments, we observe rising temperatures in the upper soil layers which will have an impact on the distribution of microbial populations, the decay rate of organic matter or the storage capacity for carbon, thus affecting the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and the viscosity of water in the soil-plant pathway, altering the transport of water. If the upper soil layers dry out faster due to less rainfall and/or increased evapotranspiration driven by higher temperatures, the spectral reflection properties of bare soil change and the transport of latent heat into the fruiting zone is increased putting a higher temperature load on the fruit. Interactions between micro-organisms in the rhizosphere and the grapevine root system are poorly understood but respond to environmental factors (such as increased soil temperatures) and the plant material (rootstock for instance), respectively the cultivation system (for example bio-organic versus conventional). This adds to an extremely complex system to manage in terms of increased resilience, adaptation to and even mitigation of climate change. Nevertheless, taken as a whole, effects on the individual expressions of wines with a given origin, seem highly likely to become more apparent.

Different soil types and relief influence the quality of Merlot grapes in a relatively small area in the Vipava Valley (Slovenia) in relation to the vine water status

Besides location and microclimatic conditions, soil plays an important role in the quality of grapes and wine. Soil properties influence…

Evolution of the amino acids content through grape ripening: Effect of foliar application of methyl jasmonate with or without urea

The parameters that determine the grape quality, and therefore the optimal harvest time, suffer variations during berry ripening, related to climate change, with the widely known problem of the gap between technological and phenolic maturities. However, there are few studies about its incidence on grape nitrogen composition. For this reason, the use of an elicitor, methyl jasmonate (MeJ), alone or with urea, is proposed as a tool to reduce climatic decoupling, allowing to establish the harvest time in order to achieve the optimum grape quality. The aim was to study the effect of MeJ and MeJ+Urea foliar applications on the evolution of Tempranillo amino acids content throughout the grape maturation. Three treatments were foliarly applied, at veraison and 7 days later: control (water), MeJ (10 mM) and MeJ+Urea (10 mM+6 kg N/ha). Grape samples were taken at five stages of maturation: day before the first and second applications, 15 days after the second application (pre-harvest), harvest day, and 15 days after harvest (post-harvest). The amino acids analysis of the samples was carried out by HPLC. Results showed that the evolution of amino acids was similar regardless of the treatment; however, foliar applications influenced the nitrogen compounds content, i.e., there was no qualitative effect but quantitative one. Most of the amino acids reached their maximum concentration in pre-harvest, being higher in grapes from the treatments than in the control. In general, no differences in grape amino acids content were observed between MeJ and MeJ+Urea treatments. Foliar applications with MeJ and MeJ+Urea enhanced the grape amino acids content, without affecting their profile, helping to optimize their quality and allowing to establish a more complete grape ripening standard. Therefore, MeJ and MeJ+Urea foliar applications can be a simple agronomic practice, which has shown promising results in order to enhance the grape quality.