IVAS 2022 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 IVAS 9 IVAS 2022 9 Selective and sensitive quantification of wine biogenic amines using a dispersive solid-phase extraction clean-up/concentration method

Selective and sensitive quantification of wine biogenic amines using a dispersive solid-phase extraction clean-up/concentration method

Abstract

Biogenic amines exist in numerous foods, including wine. They can have aliphatic (putrescine, cadaverine, spermine, and spermidine), aromatic (tyramine and phenylethylamine) and heterocyclic structure (histamine and tryptamine). In wine, the biogenic amines have three possible origins, they can be present in the grape juice, can be formed during alcoholic fermentation by yeasts, or during malolactic fermentation by the action of lactic acid bacteria that can decarboxylate amino acids present in wine. Therefore, the main request for the formation of biogenic amines is the presence of free amino acids, the existence of decarboxylase-positive microorganisms, and environmental conditions that permit bacterial growth and decarboxylase synthesis and activity [1]. In low levels, biogenic amines contribute to physiological functions like regulation of stomach pH, body temperature, or brain activity. Nevertheless, the ingestion of wines comprising high levels of biogenic amines, numerous toxicological effects may happen for example headaches, nausea, and in severe situations intracerebral hemorrhage or even death [2].
Monitoring the existence of these compounds in wine is essential, not only from the toxicological perspective but also as an indicator of wine spoilage [3]. In this work, a simple dispersive solid-phase extraction (dSPE) was developed for sample clean-up and pre-concentration of biogenic amines in wine. The dSPE using a strong cation exchange resin increased the selectivity and sensitivity of the analysis by elimination of interfering compounds and a five-fold enrichment of biogenic amines. The derivatization with benzoyl chloride and then the extraction with diethyl ether steps were optimized. HPLC with diode array detector was used as an analytical technique and this method was validated for twelve biogenic amines – ethylamine, propylamine, butylamine, putrescine, cadaverin, typtamine, b-phenylethylamine, amylamine, spermidine, hexylamine, spermine, and histamine. The method presented an adequate precision and linearity with detection limits ranging from 0.133 to 0.509 mg/L. Recoveries ranging from 72 to 99% prove the accuracy of the method for determining biogenic amines in red, white, and Tawny Port wine samples yielding chromatograms clean from interferents [4]. The method was applied successfully to the analysis of 31 young commercial red wines from the 2016 vintage collected in wineries located in different Portuguese demarcated wine regions. The dSPE method developed is a simple, cheap, quick, and green sample clean-up strategy for biogenic amine analysis. Increasing their selective and sensitive UV detection, the more used detector in liquid chromatography. The results indicated that this method is suitable for the intended purpose with a good recovery, precision, detection, and quantification limits, and with a suitable range for the amounts of biogenic amines existing in wine. 

References

[1]R. E. Anli, M. Bayram, Food Reviews International, 25:1 (2008) 86-102.
[2] A. C. Manetta, L. D. Guiseppe, R., Tofalo, M. Martuscelli, M. Schirone, M. Giammarco, G. Suzzi. Food Control. 2016. 65, 351-356.
[3] L. Beneduce, A. Romano, V. Capozzi, P. Lucas, L. Barnavon, B. Bach, P. Vuchot, F. Grieco, G. Spano. Ann. Microbiol. 2010, 60, 573-578.
[4]J. Milheiro, L. C. Ferreira, L. Filipe-Ribeiro, F. Cosme, F. M. Nunes, Food Chemistry, 274 (2019) 110-117.

DOI:

Publication date: June 24, 2022

Issue: IVAS 2022

Type: Poster

Authors

Cosme Fernanda1, Milheiro Juliana1, Ferreira Leonor C.1, Filipe-Ribeiro Luís1 and Nunes Fernando M.1

1Chemistry Research Centre-Vila Real (CQ-VR), Food and Wine Chemistry Laboratory, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, School of Life Sciences and Environment

Contact the author

Keywords

Red wine; Biogenic amines; Dispersive solid phase extraction; Derivatization, Histamine.

Tags

IVAS 2022 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

The concept of terroir: what place for microbiota?

Microbes play key roles on crop nutrient availability via biogeochemical cycles, rhizosphere interactions with roots as well as on plant growth and health. Recent advances in technologies, such as High Throughput Sequencing Techniques, allowed to gain deeper insight on the structure of bacterial and fungal communities associated with soil, rhizosphere and plant phyllosphere. Over the past 10 years, numerous scientific studies have been carried out on the microbial component of the vineyard. Whether the soil or grape compartments have been taken into account, many studies agree on the evidence of regional delineations of microbial communities, that may contribute to regional wine characteristics and typicity. Some authors proposed the term “microbial terroir” including “yeast terroir” for grapes to describe the connection between microbial biogeography and regional wine characteristics. Many factors are involved in terroir including climate, soil, cultivar and human practices as well as their interactions. Studies considering “microbial terroir” greatly contributed to improve our knowledge on factors that shape the vineyard microbial structure and diversity. However, the potential impact of “microbial terroir” on wine composition has yet not received strong scientific evidence and many questions remain to be addressed, related to the functional characterization of the microbial community and its impact on plant physiology and grape composition, the origins and interannual stability of vineyard microbiota, as well as their impact on wine sensorial attributes. The presentation will give an overview on the role of microbiota as a terroir component and will highlight future perspectives and challenges on this key subject for the wine industry.

Organic recycled mulches in sustainable viticulture: assessment of spontaneous plants communities and weed coverage

In recent years, developing more efficient and sustainable viticulture management has been essential due to the impact of climate change in semiarid regions. For this reason, the use of recycled organic mulching (ROM) in the vineyard has become an interesting strategy to cope with water stress, isolated soil from extreme temperatures and improving soil humidity, control the presence of weeds and therefore reduce the inputs of herbicides and improve soil fertility. This work aimed to analyse the effect of three different organic mulches [straw (S), grape pruning debris (GPD) and spent mushroom compost (SMC)] and two traditional soil management techniques [herbicide (H) and interrow (IN)] on weed coverage and the spontaneous plant communities’ presence. Data sampling was collected throughout the vine vegetative cycle of 2021 in La Rioja, Spain. The different soil management techniques had a clear effect on weed coverage and his development during the vine vegetative cycle. SMC and H were the treatments with the highest and the lowest coverage percentage, respectively. IN had a delayed weed emergence at the beginning of the vine vegetative cycle, but finally it reached maximum values nearby SMC. GPD and S had similar effects on weed emergence, reaching 25-30% of the maximum coverage values. A total of 29 herbaceous species were identified during the vegetative cycle, some of them very isolated and occasional. Principal component analysis (PCAs) showed a good association between spontaneous species and treatments, furthermore, specific species-treatment associations were found. Moreover, three clear groups of herbaceous communities were identified by cluster analysis. This study provides interesting information about the effect of different alternative soil management on herbaceous plant coverage and weed species communities which could contribute to making more sustainable viticulture.

20-Year-Old data set: scion x rootstock x climate, relationships. Effects on phenology and sugar dynamics

Global warming is one of the biggest environmental, social, and economic threats. In the Douro Valley, change to the climate are expected in the coming years, namely an increase in average temperature and a decrease in annual precipitation. Since vine cultivation is extremely vulnerable and influenced by the climate, these changes are likely to have negative effects on the production and quality of wine.
Adaptation is a major challenge facing the viticulture sector where the choice of plant material plays an important role, particularly the rootstock as it is a driver for adaptation with a wide range of effects, the most important being phylloxera, nematode and salt, tolerance to drought and a complex set of interactions in the grafted plant.
In an experimental vineyard, established in the Douro Region in 1997, with four randomized blocs, with five varieties, Touriga Nacional, Tinta Barroca, Touriga Franca and Tinta Roriz, grafted in four rootstocks, Rupestris du Lot, R110, 196-17C, R99 and 1103P, data was collected consecutively over 20 years (2001-2020). Phenological observations were made two to three times a week, following established criteria, to determine the average dates of budbreak, flowering and veraison. During maturation, weekly berry samples were taken to study the dynamics of sugar accumulation, amongst other parameters. Climate data was collected from a weather station located near the vineyard parcel, with data classified through several climatic indices.
The results achieved show a very low coefficient of variations in the average date of the phenophases and an important contribution from the rootstock in the dynamic of the phenology, allowing a delay in the cycle of up to10-12 days for the different combinations. The Principal Component Analysis performed, evaluating trends in the physical-chemical parameters, highlighted the effect of the climate and rootstock on fruit quality by grape varieties.

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.

Delaying irrigation initiation linearly reduces yield with little impact on maturity in Pinot noir

When to initiate irrigation is a critical annual management decision that has cascading effects on grapevine productivity and wine quality in the context of climate change. A multi-site trial was begun in 2021 to optimize irrigation initiation timing using midday stem water potential (ψstem) thresholds characterized as departures from non-stressed baseline ψstemvalues (Δψstem). Plant material, vine and row spacing, and trellising systems were concomitant among sites, while vine age, soil type, and pruning systems varied. Five target Δψstem thresholds were arranged in an RCBD and replicated eight times at each site: 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, and 1.0 MPa (T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively). When thresholds were reached, plots were irrigated weekly at 70% ETc. Yield components and berry composition were quantified at harvest. To better generalize inferences across sites, data were analyzed by ANOVA using a mixed model including site as a random factor. Across sites, irrigation was initiated at Δψstem = 0.24, 0.50, 0.65, 0.93, and 0.98 MPa for T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively. Consistent significant negative linear trends were found for several key yield and berry composition variables. Yield decreased by 12.9, 15.9, 19.5, and 27.4% for T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively, compared to T1 (p < 0.0001) across sites that were driven by similarly linear reductions in berry weight (p < 0.0001). Comparatively, berry composition varied little among treatments. Juice total soluble solids decreased linearly from T1 to T5 – though only ranged 0.9 Brix (p = 0.012). Because producers are paid by the ton, and contracts simply stipulate a target maturity level, first-year results suggest that there is no economic incentive to induce moderate water deficits before irrigation initiation, regardless of vineyard site. Subsequent years will further elucidate the carryover effects of delaying irrigation initiation on productivity over the long term.