IVAS 2022 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 IVAS 9 IVAS 2022 9 Exploring the influence of terroir on the sensorial and aroma profiles of wines – An application to red wines from AOC Corbières

Exploring the influence of terroir on the sensorial and aroma profiles of wines – An application to red wines from AOC Corbières

Abstract

The aromatic profile of a wine is the result of volatile molecules present in grapes (varietal or primary aromas) and those produced during the winemaking process of fermentation (secondary aromas) and during wine aging (tertiary aromas). Depending on their concentrations and interactions with other molecules, aromatic compounds contribute, to different extents, to the final bouquet of the wines. The analysis of the profile of volatile compounds of a wine can help exploring the chemical link between the product and the terroir from which it originates. Indeed, when referring to the concept of terroir, grape variety expression in wine results from an interaction between the place (climate, soil) and the people (tradition, viticultural practices and winemaking) [2,3]. These parameters can influence the final concentration of aromas, thus contributing to the overall sensory perception. To explore the influence of “terroir” factors on the aromatic and sensory profile of wines, red wines from the AOC Corbières were subjected to a global aromatic and sensory analysis. The aim is to identify the “molecular markers” that can characterise the different wines and to assess whether these markers are related to each other and explained by their area of origin. The aromatic profile was evaluated by HS-SPME-GC-MS and the sensory analysis was performed by a QDA (Quantitative Descriptive Analysis) profile method.  The terroir and winemaking parameters (type of winemaking, yeast, blending) were considered and multifactorial analysis were performed to link these data to the aromatic and/or sensory profiles. Statistical analysis highlight differences either between the samples and the study areas. Differences in the aroma profile were mainly attributed to some fermentative (e.g. acetate and ethyl esters) and varietal (e.g. terpenols and C13-norisoprenoids) aromas. Sensory analysis showed significant differences between samples on some quality descriptors (e.g. cooked red fruit). New interpretation leads are being explored to connect these first results to future experiments.The aromatic profile of a wine is the result of volatile molecules present in grapes (varietal or primary aromas) and those produced during the winemaking process of fermentation (secondary aromas) and during wine aging (tertiary aromas). Depending on their concentrations and interactions with other molecules, aromatic compounds contribute, to different extents, to the final bouquet of the wines. The analysis of the profile of volatile compounds of a wine can help exploring the chemical link between the product and the terroir from which it originates. Indeed, when referring to the concept of terroir, grape variety expression in wine results from an interaction between the place (climate, soil) and the people (tradition, viticultural practices and winemaking) [2,3]. These parameters can influence the final concentration of aromas, thus contributing to the overall sensory perception. To explore the influence of “terroir” factors on the aromatic and sensory profile of wines, red wines from the AOC Corbières were subjected to a global aromatic and sensory analysis. The aim is to identify the “molecular markers” that can characterise the different wines and to assess whether these markers are related to each other and explained by their area of origin. The aromatic profile was evaluated by HS-SPME-GC-MS and the sensory analysis was performed by a QDA (Quantitative Descriptive Analysis) profile method.  The terroir and winemaking parameters (type of winemaking, yeast, blending) were considered and multifactorial analysis were performed to link these data to the aromatic and/or sensory profiles. Statistical analysis highlight differences either between the samples and the study areas. Differences in the aroma profile were mainly attributed to some fermentative (e.g. acetate and ethyl esters) and varietal (e.g. terpenols and C13-norisoprenoids) aromas. Sensory analysis showed significant differences between samples on some quality descriptors (e.g. cooked red fruit). New interpretation leads are being explored to connect these first results to future experiments.

References

[1] Falqué, E., Fernandez, E., & Dubourdieu, D. (2001). Differentiation of white wines by their aromatic index. Talanta, 54, 271–281.
[2] Kustos, M., Gambetta, J., Jeffery, D.W., Heymann, H., Goodman, S., & Bastiana, S.E.P. (2020). A matter of place: Sensory and chemical characterisation of fine Australian Chardonnay and Shiraz wines of provenance. Food Research International, 130, 2-11.
[3] Vaudour, E. (2002). The quality of grapes and wine in relation to geography: Notions of terroir at various scales. Journal of Wine Research, 13(2), 117–141.

DOI:

Publication date: June 23, 2022

Issue: IVAS 2022

Type: Poster

Authors

Argentero Alice1, Caille Soline1, Nolleau Valérie1, Godet Teddy1, Verneuil Catherine2, Mouls Laetitia1 and Rigou Peggy1

1UMR SPO, Univ Montpellier, INRAE, Institut Agro
2Syndicat Général de l’AOC Corbières

List of affiliations ¹ ² ³

Contact the author

Keywords

Terroir, molecular marker, Aroma compounds, HS-SPME-GC-MS, Sensorial analysis

Tags

IVAS 2022 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Influence of agronomic practices in soil water content in mid-mountain vineyards

In the context of LIFE project MIDMACC (LIFE18 CCA/ES/001099), several pilots have been installed in vineyards in mid mountain areas of Catalonia (NE Spain) to test well stablished agronomic practices to increase the adaptation of Mediterranean mid mountain to climate change. Soil water content (SWC) at three different depths (15, 30 and 45cm) was measured in continuum from August 2020. One pilot (WC) included a well-established green cover (GC), a new GC (NC) and a conventional soil management (CM, tilling+herbicides). NC presented an intermediate state between WC and CM, responding similarly to CM in autumn but quickly reaching similar SWC to WC, then following the same evolution till next spring, with CM presenting lower values along autumn and winter. Then vegetation activation decreased SWC in all plots, (much slower in CM, lacking GC). Sensibility to spring rains is again intermediate for NC, which joins SWC evolution of CM by the end of spring till next autumn. It is expected that NC will resemble WC more and more as its GC develops. In the pilot combining vine training (VSP vs Gobelet) and hillside management (slope vs terrace), no clear pattern could be related with these conditions. However, both terraces seem to be more sensitive to spring rains. A third pilot included new vineyards (7 and 1 year old). In the new vineyard (N), higher canopy development, a spontaneous green cover and row straw resulted in a slower SWC dynamic, not so sensitive to rains but conserving more soil water in spring and most of summer, even with presumably a higher water extraction by vines. In the newest vineyard (VN) the deepest sensor is still sensitive to rain events all over the year and SWC is always highest at this depth, revealing small water capture by vines.

Protected Designation of Origin (D.P.O.) Valdepeñas: classification and map of soils

The objective of the work described here is the elaboration of a map of the different types of vineyard soils that to guide the famers in the choice of the most productive vine rootstocks and varieties. 90 vineyard soils profiles were analysed in the entire territory of the Origen Denominations of Valdepeñas. The sampling was carried out in 2018 (June to October) by making a sampling grid, followed by photointerpretation and control in the field. The studied soils can be grouped into 9 different soil types (according to FAO 2006 classification): Leptosols, Regosols, Fluvisols, Gleysols, Cambisols, Calcisols, Luvisols and Anthrosols. A map showing the soil distribution with different type of soils has been made with the ArcGIS program. Regarding to the choice of rootstock, Calcisoles are soils with a high active limestone content, so the rootstocks used in these soils must be resistant to this parameter; Luvisols are deep soils with high clay content, so they will support vigorous rootstocks. Because the cartographic units are composed of two or more subgroups, with are associated in variable proportions, 9 different soil associations have been established; Unit 1: Leptosols, Cambisols and Luvisols (80%, 15% and 5% respectively); Unit 2: Cambisols with Regosols and Luvisols (40%, 30% and 30% respectively); Unit 3: Cambisols and Gleysols with Regosols (40%, 40% and 20% respectively); Unit 4: Regosols with Cambisols, Leptosols and Calcisols (40%, 30%, 15% and 15% respectively); Unit 5: Cambisols, Leptosols, Calcisols and Regosols (25% each of them); Unit 6: Luvisols with Cambisol and Calcisols (80%, 10% and 10% respectively); Unit 7: Luvisols and Calcisols with Cambisols (40%, 40% and 20% respectively); Unit 8: Calcisols with, Cambisols and Luvisols (80%, 10% and 10% respectively); Unit 9: Anthrosols. These study allow to elaborate the first map of vineyard soils of this Protected Designation of Origin in Castilla-La Mancha.

Mapping and tracking canopy size with VitiCanopy

Understanding vineyard variability to target management strategies, apply inputs efficiently and deliver consistent grape quality to the winery is essential. However, despite inherent vineyard variability, the majority are managed as if they are uniform. VitiCanopy is a simple, grower-friendly tool for precision/digital viticulture that allows users to collect and interpret objective spatial information about vineyard performance. After four years of field and market research, an upgraded VitiCanopy has been created to achieve a more streamlined, technology-assisted vine monitoring tool that provides users with a set of superior new features, which could significantly improve the way users monitor their grapevines. These new features include:
• New user interface
• User authentication
• Batch analysis of multiple images
• Ease the learning curve through enhanced help features
• Reporting via the creation of colour maps that will allow users to assess the spatial differences in canopies within a vineyard.
Use-case examples are presented to demonstrate the quantification and mapping of vineyard variability through objective canopy measurements, ground-truthing of remotely sensed measurements, monitoring of crop conditions, implementation of disease and water management decisions as well as creating a history of each site to forecast quality. This intelligent tool allows users to manage grapevines and make informed management choices to achieve the desired production targets and remain profitable.

Assessing the climate change vulnerability of European winegrowing regions by combining exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity indicators

Winegrowing regions recognized as protected designations of origin (PDOs) are closely tied to well defined geographic locations with a specific set of pedoclimatic attributes and strictly regulated by legal specifications. However, climate change is increasingly threatening these regions by changing local conditions and altering winegrowing processes. The vulnerability to these changes is largely heterogenous across different winegrowing regions because it is determined by individual characteristics of each region, including the capacity to adapt to new climatic conditions and the sensitivity to climate change, which depend not only on natural, but also socioeconomic and legal factors. Accurate vulnerability assessments therefore need to combine information about adaptive capacity and climate change sensitivity with projected exposure to new climatic conditions. However, most existing studies focus on specific impacts neglecting important interactions between the different factors that determine climate change vulnerability. Here, we present the first comprehensive vulnerability assessment of European wine PDOs that spatially combines multiple indicators of adaptive capacity and climate change sensitivity with high-resolution climate projections. We found that the climate change vulnerability of PDO areas largely depends on the complex interactions between physical and socioeconomic factors. Homogenous topographic conditions and a narrow varietal spectrum increase climate change vulnerability, while the skills and education of farmers, together with a good economic situation, decrease their vulnerability. Assessments of climate change consequences therefore need to consider multiple variables as well as their interrelations to provide a comprehensive understanding of the expected impacts of climate change on European PDOs. Our results provide the first vulnerability assessment for European winegrowing regions at high spatiotemporal resolution that includes multiple factors related to climate exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity on the level of single winegrowing regions. They will therefore help to identify hot spots of climate change vulnerability among European PDOs and efficiently direct adaptation strategies.

Second pruning as a strategy to delay maturation in cv. ‘Touriga nacional’ in the Portuguese Douro region

The advance in maturation of wine grapes is an important climate change risk related effect that could affect warm regions like Portuguese Douro Wine Region. Indeed, the climate analysis over the past years registered a decrease in the precipitation, significant higher average temperatures, and a more frequent occurrence of extreme weather events, including heat waves. In these conditions the length from anthesis until maturation is shortened and the uncoupling of technical and phenolic maturity results in berries with higher sugar concentration (and lower acidity), but lower anthocyanins, tannins, and total phenolic concentration, which produce unbalanced wines.
In this work, an innovative strategy of crop forcing, based on forcing vine regrowth after a second pruning of green shoots, was tested, aimed at delaying ripening until the temperature becomes lower and, therefore, preventing acidity loss and increasing anthocyanin-to-sugar ratio. The experiments were conducted in 2019 and 2020 in a commercial vineyard of ‘Touriga Nacional’ located in the Douro Region. Crop forcing was conducted 15 (CF1) to 30 (CF2) days after fruit set. Vines pruned with conventional methods were used as control (CF0). Results confirmed that fruit ripening was shifted from the hot season (August/September), until a cooler period (October through early-November). At harvest, grapevine berries from CF1 and CF2 presented lower pH and higher acidity, than control, with no significant differences in colour intensity and phenolic levels composition. Sugar content was lower in CF2-treated vines in both seasons. However, in CF-treated vines the number and size of clusters were significantly lower (up to 88% reduction) than in control plants. A metabolomics analysis of mature berries from CF-treated vines and control is underway. Crop forcing was indeed effective in producing a more balance berry composition but severely reduced grapevine yield,