IVAS 2022 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 IVAS 9 IVAS 2022 9 Aroma diversity of Amarone commercial wines

Aroma diversity of Amarone commercial wines

Abstract

Amarone is an Italian red wine produced in the Valpolicella area, in north-eastern Italy. Due to its elaboration with withered grapes, Amarone is a rather unique example of dry red wine. However, there is very limited data so far concerning the volatile composition of commercial Amarone wines, which also undergo a cask aging of 2-4 years before release. The present work aims at characterizing the aroma composition of Amarone and to elucidate the relationships between chemical composition and sensory characters.  Two sets of Amarone wines from different vintages 2015 (17 wines) and 2016 (15 wines) were analyzed. The analyses were carried out by means of Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) and extracted by Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) and Solid Phase Micro Extraction (SPME). In addition, the sampled wines were subjected to a sensory evaluation in the form of sorting task. From both data sets, 70 volatile compounds were successfully identified and quantified, 30 of which were present in concentrations above their odor thresholds in all the samples. Using the odor activity value (OAV), the compounds that potentially contribute to Amarone perceived aroma are b-damascenone, ethyl and isoamyl acetate, ethyl esters (hexanoate, octanoate, butanoate, 3-methybutanoate), 4-ethyl guaiacol, 3-methylbutanoic acid, dimethyl sulfide (DMS), eugenol, massoia lactone, 1,4-cineol, TDN, cis-whisky lactone. The only differences found between the two vintages’ OAV list, could be observed in the presence of dimethyl trisulfide (DMTS) in the vintage 2015; whereas in the 2016 set g-nonalactone and trans-whisky lactone were found. Regarding the compounds that impart the most differences across both vintages, OAV max/min, where 4- ethyl phenol, 4-ethyl guaiacol, 1,8-cineole, 1,4-cineole, dimethyl sulfide (DMS). Results from the sorting task sensory analysis of the 17 wines from vintage 2015 showed three clusters formed. Cluster 1 composed of eight wines and described as “red fruit”, “solvent” and “sweet spices”. Cluster 2 formed by four Amarone was associated mainly with the “animal” and “oak/toasted” attributes. And cluster 3 (five wines) described with the attribute “cooked fruit”. While in the sorting task of vintage 2016 (15 wines) two clusters were formed: cluster A formed by 5 wines described as “cooked fruit” and “solvent”; and cluster B (10 wines) associated with the attributes “sweet spices”, “red fruit” and “oak/toasted”. To our knowledge the present research is the first attempt to identify and classify Amarone della Valpolicella commercial wines in terms of aroma. This study provides a list of compounds that can be characteristic of Amarone wine and that have been consistent across two vintages coming from different wineries . Moreover, from the volatiles analyzed, compounds such as dimethyl sulfide (DMS) and cineoles have been singled out as potential aroma markers of diversity in Amarone wines

DOI:

Publication date: June 24, 2022

Issue: IVAS 2022

Type: Poster

Authors

Samaniego Solis Jessica Anahi¹, Luzzini Giovanni¹, Slaghenaufi Davide¹and Ugliano Maurizio¹

¹University of Verona

Contact the author

Keywords

Amarone, grape withering, chemical characterization, Corvina, Corvinone

Tags

IVAS 2022 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

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…

Frost risk projections in a changing climate are highly sensitive in time and space to frost modelling approaches

Late spring frost is a major challenge for various winegrowing regions across the world, its occurrence often leading to important yield losses and/or plant failure. Despite a significant increase in minimum temperatures worldwide, the spatial and temporal evolution of spring frost risk under a warmer climate remains largely uncertain. Recent projections of spring frost risk for viticulture in Europe throughout the 21st century show that its evolution strongly depends on the model approach used to simulate budburst. Furthermore, the frost damage modelling methods used in these projections are usually not assessed through comparison to field observations and/or frost damage reports.
The present study aims at comparing frost risk projections simulated using six spring frost models based on two approaches: a) models considering a fixed damage threshold after the predicted budburst date (e.g BRIN, Smoothed-Utah, Growing Degree Days, Fenovitis) and b) models considering a dynamic frost sensitivity threshold based on the predicted grapevine winter/spring dehardening process (e.g. Ferguson model). The capability of each model to simulate an actual frost event for the Vitis vinifera cv. Chadonnay B was previously assessed by comparing simulated cold thermal stress to reports of events with frost damage in Chablis, the northernmost winegrowing region of Burgundy. Models exhibited scores of κ > 0.65 when reproducing the frost/non-frost damage years and an accuracy ranging from 0.82 to 0.90.
Spring frost risk projections throughout the 21st century were performed for all winegrowing subregions of Bourgogne-Franche-Comté under two CMIP5 concentration pathways (4.5 and 8.5) using statistically downscaled 8×8 km daily air temperature and humidity of 13 climate models. Contrasting results with region-specific spring frost risk trends were observed. Three out of five models show a decrease in the frequency of frost years across the whole study area while the other two show an increase that is more or less pronounced depending on winegrowing subregion. Our findings indicate that the lack of accuracy in grapevine budburst and dehardening models makes climate projections of spring frost risk highly uncertain for grapevine cultivation regions.

Updating the Winkler index: An analysis of Cabernet sauvignon in Napa Valley’s varied and changing climate

This study aims to create an updated, agile viticultural climate index (similar to the Winkler Index) by performing in-depth analyses of current and historical data from industry partners in several major winegrowing regions. The Winkler Index was developed in the early twentieth century based on analysis of various grape-growing regions in California. The index uses heat accumulation (i.e. Growing Degree Days) throughout the growing season to determine which grape varieties are best suited to each region. As viticultural regions are increasingly subject to the complexity and uncertainty of a changing climate, a more rigorous, agile model is needed to aid grape growers in determining which cultivars to plant where. For the first phase of this study, 21 industry partners throughout Napa Valley shared historical phenology, harvest, viticultural practice, and weather data related to their Cabernet sauvignon vineyard blocks. To complement this data, berry samples were collected throughout the 2021 growing season from 50 vineyard blocks located throughout 16 American Viticultural Areas that were then analyzed for basic berry chemistry and phenolics. These blocks have been mapped using a Geographic Information System (GIS), enabling analysis of altitude, vineyard row orientation, slope, and remotely sensed climate data. Sampling sites were also chosen based on their proximity to a weather station. By analyzing historical data from industry partners and data specifically collected for this study, it is possible to identify key parameters for further analysis. Initial results indicate extreme variability at a high spatial resolution not currently accounted for in modern viticultural climate indices and suggest that viticultural practices play a major role. Using the structure of data collection and analyses developed for the first phase, this project will soon be expanded to other wine regions globally, while continuing data collection in Napa Valley.

Photoselective shade films affect grapevine berry secondary metabolism and wine composition

Grapevine physiology and production are challenged by forecasted increases in temperature and water deficits. Within this scenario, photoselective overhead shade films are promising tools in warm viticulture areas to overcome climate change related factors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the vulnerability of ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ grape berry to solar radiation overexposure and optimize shade film use for berry integrity. A randomized complete block design field study was conducted across two years (2020-2021) in Oakville, Napa Valley, CA, with four shade films (D1, D3, D4, D5) differing in the percent of radiation spectra transmitted and compared to an uncovered control (C0). Integrals for gas exchange parameters and mid-day stem water potential were unaffected by the shade films in 2020 and 2021. By harvest, berries from uncovered and shaded vines did not differ in their size or primary metabolism in either year. Despite precipitation exclusion during the dormant season in the shaded treatments, yield did not differ between them and the control in either season. In 2020, total skin anthocyanins (mg/g fresh mass) in the shaded treatments was greater than C0 during berry ripening and at harvest. Conversely, flavonol concentrations in 2020 were reduced in shaded vines compared to C0. The 2020 growing season highlighted the impact of heat degradation on flavonoids. Flavonoid concentrations in 2021 increased until harvest while flavonoid degradation was apparent from veraison to harvest in 2020 across shaded and control vines. Wine analyses highlighted the importance of light spectra to modify wine composition. Wine color intensity, tonality and anthocyanin values were enhanced in D4 whereas antioxidant properties were enhanced in C0 and D5 wines. Altogether, our results highlighted the need of new approaches in warm viticulture areas given the impact that composition of light has on berry and wine quality.

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.