IVAS 2022 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 IVAS 9 IVAS 2022 9 The antioxidant properties of wine lees extracts in model wine

The antioxidant properties of wine lees extracts in model wine

Abstract

While the ethanol and tartaric acid contained in wine lees are typically recovered by distilleries, the remaining solid fraction (yeast biomass) is usually disposed of, thus negatively affecting the overall sustainability of the wine industry. Previously we demonstrated that the wine lees’ solid fraction could be submitted to a food-grade physical extraction method (autoclave, 20 min, 121°C) to yield yeast polysaccharides with proven foaming, emulsifying and wine stabilizing properties [1,2]. In this study, the autoclave extraction procedure was applied directly on lees from red winemaking. As a result, two extracts were obtained: the Total extract, namely the whole lees after autoclave containing the soluble and insoluble fractions; the Supernatant, containing only the soluble compounds released during extraction. The composition of the extracts in terms of protein, polysaccharides, glutathione, total thiols, and total polyphenol content, was determined by spectrophotometric and chromatographic analytical methods. Subsequently, the extract’s oxidative behavior was tested by dissolving them (0.5 g/L) in model wine (20% EtOH, 5 g/L tartaric acid, 5 mg/L Fe, 0.5 mg/L Cu) containing 30 mg/L free SO2 and 0.5g/L catechin. The O2 and SO2 consumption, color development (as a function of catechin degradation), and linear sweep voltammetry (LSV) behavior were investigated. The effect of the wine lees’ extracts was benchmarked against analogs extracts obtained from a lab-grown culture of the same yeast strain present in the wine lees. Samples prepared with the wine lees’ extracts showed a higher O2 and SO2 consumption rates compared to those prepared with the lab-grown yeast extracts. All extracts protected the catechin from oxidation, with the best protective action achieved by the Total wine lees extract. This extract, along with its analog from the lab-grown yeast culture, showed the greatest resistance to anodic oxidation according to LSV. The protective action on catechin displayed by all the extracts was not fully explainable by their content in antioxidant compounds as glutathione, thiols, and wine polyphenols. Interestingly, the fact that the best results were obtained using the Total extracts in which both the soluble (released polysaccharides) and insoluble (yeast cell walls) fractions were present, allowed to hypothesize that other compounds are involved in limiting the catechin oxidation. In this scenario, the candidates are the yeast membrane sterols as they possess an oxygen-consuming action, and yeast cell wall polysaccharides as they could bind to catechin thus making it unavailable for oxidation. To conclude, wine lees can be considered a novel source of yeast extract with potential oenological application also against quality-affecting oxidative reactions. If adopted on a large scale,  this wine lees valorization strategy would result in an improvement of the overall sustainability of the wine industry.

References

[1] De Iseppi, A., Marangon, M., Vincenzi, S., Lomolino, G., Curioni, A., & Divol, B. (2021). A novel approach for the valorization of wine lees as a source of compounds able to modify wine properties. LWT, 136, 110274.
[2] De Iseppi, A., Marangon, M., Lomolino, G., Crapisi, A., & Curioni, A. (2021). Red and white wine lees as a novel source of emulsifiers and foaming agents. LWT, 152, 112273.

DOI:

Publication date: June 23, 2022

Issue: IVAS 2022

Type: Article

Authors

De IseppiAlberto1, Curioni Andrea1,2, Marangon Matteo1,2, Invincibile Diletta3, Slaghenaufi Davide3 and Ugliano Maurizio3

1Department of Agronomy, Food, Natural Resources, Animals and Environment (DAFNAE), University of Padova, Viale dell’Università, 16, 35020 Legnaro, Padua, Italy
2Centre for Research in Viticulture and Enology (CIRVE), University of Padova, Conegliano, Italy
3Department of Biotechnology, University of Verona, San Pietro in Cariano, Italy

Contact the author

Keywords

wine lees, wine oxidation, voltammetry, wine color, by-product valorization

Tags

IVAS 2022 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

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.

Effects of organic mulches on the soil environment and yield of grapevine

Farming management practices aiming at conserving soil moisture have been developed in arid and semiarid-areas facing water scarcity problems. Organic mulching is an effective method to manipulate the crop-growing microclimate increasing crop yield by controlling soil temperature, and retaining soil moisture by reducing soil evaporation. In this sense, the effectiveness of different organic mulching materials (straw mulch and grapevine pruning debris) applied within the row of a vineyard was evaluated on the soil and on the vine in a Tempranillo vineyard located in La Rioja (Spain). Organic mulches were compared with a traditional bare soil management technique (based on the use of herbicides to avoid weed incidence). Mulching coverages favourably influenced the soil water retention throughout all the grapevine vegetative cycle. However, the soil-moisture variation was not the same under different mulching materials, being the straw mulch (SM) the one that retained more water in comparison with grapevine pruning debris (GPD) based-cover. The changes of soil moisture in the upper surface layer (0–10 cm) were highly dynamic, probably due to water vapour fluxes across the soil-atmospheric interface. However, both, SM and GPD reduced these fluctuations as compared with bare soils. A similar trend occurred with soil temperature. Both organic mulches altered soil temperature in comparison with bare soil by reducing soil temperature in summer and raising it in winter. Moreover, the same buffering effect for the temperature on the covered soil also remains in the deeper layers. To conclude, we could see that organic mulching had a positive impact on soil-moisture storage and soil temperature and the extent of this effect depends on the type of mulching materials. These changes led to higher rates of photosynthesis and stomatal conductivity compared to bare soils, also favouring crop growth and grape yields.

Understanding graft union formation by using metabolomic and transcriptomic approaches during the first days after grafting in grapevine

Since the arrival of Phyloxera (Daktulosphaira vitifolia) in Europe at the end of the 19th century, grafting has become essential to cultivate Vitis vinifera. Today, grafting provides not only resistance to this aphid, but it used to adapt the cultivars according to the type of soil, environment, or grape production requirements by using a panel of rootstocks. As part of vineyard decline, it is often mentioned the importance of producing quality grafted grapevine to improve vineyard longevity, but, to our knowledge, no study has been able to demonstrate that grafting has a role in this context. However, some scion/rootstock combinations are considered as incompatible due to poor graft union formation and subsequently high plant mortality soon after grafting. In a context of climate change where the creation of new cultivars and rootstocks is at the centre of research, the ability of new cultivars to be grafted is therefore essential. The early identification of graft incompatibility could allow the selection of non-viable plants before planting and would have a beneficial impact on research and development in the nursery sector. For this reason, our studies have focused on the identification of metabolic and transcriptomic markers of poor grafting success during the first days/week after grafting; we have identified some correlations between some specialized metabolites, especially stilbenes, and grafting success, as well as an accumulation of some amino acids in the incompatible combination. The study of the metabolome and the transcriptome allowed us to understand and characterise the processes involved during graft union formation.

Diagnosis of soil quality and evaluation of the impact of viticultural practices on soil biodiversity in a vineyard in southwestern France

Viticulture is facing two major changes – climate change and agroecological transition. In both cases, soil quality is seen as a lever to move towards a more sustainable viticulture. However, soil biological quality is little considered in the implementation of viticultural practices. Gascogn’Innov (2017-2022) is an Operational Group funded by the European Innovation Partnership for Agriculture. As such, it brings together winegrowers from the south-west of France, scientists, advisors and technicians, around a project focused on viticultural soil biological functioning and the design of technical routes more respectful toward soil heritage. To achieve this, the project aims to acquire references on the impact of viticultural practices on soil biology from a dynamic way, and to test a methodology to integrate information provided by the soil bioindicators to manage farming systems. A set of indicators of soil biological quality are evaluated in the project: microorganisms (bacteria and fungi abundance and diversity), fauna (abundance and diversity of nematodes and earthworms), physico-chemical characteristics, soil structure assessment and degradation rate of organic matter. Based on a network of 13 plots that have been subject to an initial diagnosis in 2017, several agronomical practices to restore soil fertility are experimented to redesign the cropping system (for instance plant cover, organic matter inputs, reduction of herbicides, mineral fertilizers). System redesign was made in collaboration by winegrowers and an interdisciplinary group of experts (agronomists, biologists). Several indicators are measured on vine and soil at each vintage to assess vine health and productivity. At the end of the project (2021), a final diagnosis was carried out. Gascogn’Innov allowed to create a regional database on the quality of wine-growing soils, which permitted to evaluate the effect of practices according to soil types. Especially, decreasing the intensity of tillage and increasing the duration and diversity of grass coverage tends to increase the abundance of all the organisms studied. This project confirmed the value of soil biological quality indicators to drive the sustainability of practices, but also highlighted the key-role of expertise, in both agronomy and soil biology, to help winegrowers understand and appropriate their soil quality diagnoses.

Ecophysiological performance of Vitis rootstocks under water stress

The use of rootstocks tolerant to soil water deficit is an interesting strategy to cope with limited water availability. Currently, several nurseries are breeding new genotypes, but the physiological basis of its responses under water stress are largely unknown. To this end, an ecophysiological assessment of the conventional 110-Richter (110R) and SO4, and the new M1 and M4 rootstocks was carried out in potted ungrafted plants. During one season, these Vitis genotypes were grown under greenhouse conditions and subjected to two water regimes, well-watered and water deficit. Water potentials of plants under water deficit down to < -1.4 MPa, and net photosynthesis (AN) <5 μmol m-2 s-1 did not cause leaf oxidative stress damage compared to well-watered conditions in any of the genotypes. The antioxidant capacity was sufficient to neutralize the mild oxidative stress suffered. Under both treatments, gravimetric differences in daily water use were observed among genotypes, leading to differences in the biomass of root, shoot and leaf. Under well-watered conditions, SO4 and 110R were the most vigorous and M1 and M4 the least. However, under water stress, SO4 exhibited the greatest reduction in biomass while M4 showed the lowest. Remarkably, under these conditions, SO4 reached the least negative stem water potential (Ψstem), while M1 reduced stomatal conductance (gs) and AN the most. In addition, SO4 and M1 genotypes also showed the highest and lowest hydraulic conductance values, respectively. Our results suggest that there are differences in water use regulation among genotypes, not only attributed to differences in stomatal regulation or intrinsic water use efficiency at the leaf level. Therefore, because no differences in canopy-to-root ratio were achieved, it is hypothesized that xylem vessel anatomical differences may be driving the reported differences among rootstocks performance. Results demonstrate that each Vitis rootstock differs in its ecophysiological responses under water stress.