IVAS 2022 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 IVAS 9 IVAS 2022 9 Structural composition of polymeric polyphenols of red wine after long-term ageing: effect of vinification technology

Structural composition of polymeric polyphenols of red wine after long-term ageing: effect of vinification technology

Abstract

Aged red wines possess phenolic composition very different from young ones due to the transformations among native grape phenolics and the formation of new polymeric polyphenols during aging process. In this work, Syrah red wines were made by different winemaking technologies, i.e., traditional fermentation on skin (total 7 days of maceration), prolonged maceration with addition of extra skins at the end of traditional fermentation (total 14 days of maceration) and prolonged maceration with addition of extra stems at the end of traditional fermentation (total 14 days of maceration). After 8 years of ageing in bottle, the structural composition of polymeric polyphenols in these wines was comprehensively analysed through different degradation methods (hydrochloric acid hydrolysis, NaOH hydrolysis and Benzyl mercaptan hydrolysis), followed by HPLC-FT-ICR-MS, HPLC/UPLC-MS analysis. The results showed that the molecules of polymeric polyphenols in the aged red wines were composed of not only proanthocyanidins but also anthocyanins, amino acids and phenolic acids. The percentages of the constitutive units of the polymeric polyphenol molecules in these wines varied considerably, being catechin (7.1 – 14.9%), epicatechin (74.5 – 78.2%), epicatechin-3-O-gallate (5.8 – 12.2%), amino acids (0.7 – 1.5%), phenolic acids (0.0 – 0.9%) anthocyanins (0.1 – 0.4%) and epigallocatechin (0.7 – 4.7%),  depending on the type of the winemaking technologies. Catechin, epicatechin and epicatechin-3-O-gallate were presented as both terminal and extension units, with the latter predominant, while amino acids, phenolic acids and anthocyanins were found to be presented exclusively as terminal units and epigallocatechin was found to be presented exclusively as extension units. Comparing with the wine made by traditional fermentation on skin, the lower phenolic acids and anthocyanins units was found in the wine made by prolonged fermentation/maceration with skin and with stem. The prolonged fermentation/maceration with skin was found to have highest amino acids units. On the other hand, different vinification technologies affected the mean polymerization degrees (mDP) of polymeric polyphenols in the aged red wines, being mDP 25.2 for the control one, mDP 13.1 for the wine made by the prolonged fermentation with skin and mDP 15.7 for the prolonged fermention with stem. These results indicated that, different winemaking technologies affect significantly the structural features of polymeric polyphenols.

DOI:

Publication date: June 24, 2022

Issue: IVAS 2022

Type: Poster

Authors

Sun Baoshan1, Jian Zhao3, Tingting Yang1, Martins Patrícia2, Ramos João4 and Lingxi Li1

1School of Functional Food and Wine, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University
2Pólo Dois Portos, Instituto Nacional de Investigação Agrária e Veterinária, I.P.

3School of Traditional Chinese Materia Medica, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University
4Departamento de Enologia, Herdade do Esporão, Reguengos de Monsaraz

Contact the author

Keywords

polymeric polyphenols; winemaking technology; structural composition; aged red wine

Tags

IVAS 2022 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

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.

Impact of changes in pruning practices on vine growth and yield

A gradual decline in vineyards has been observed over the past twenty years worldwide. This might be explained by the climate change, practices change or the increase of dieback diseases. To increase the longevity of vines, we studied the impact of different pruning strategies in four adult and four young vineyards located in France and Spain. In France, vineyards were planted with Cabernet franc on 3309C while Spanish trials were planted with Tempranillo grafted on 110R. Vegetative expression, yield, quality of berries and wood vessels conductivity were measured. The distribution of vegetative expression, yield and berry composition between primary and secondary vegetation were quantified. Finally, tomography was used to evaluate the implication of the treatments on sap flows.
First results show that i) the respectful pruning leads to an increase of 30 to 50% more secondary shoots than the aggressive pruning in France and between 15 and 20% in Spain, ii) there is no major effect on the yield over the first two years following the implementation of the new pruning practices, although the proportion of clusters from suckers is higher on the respectful pruning method. On young vines, the development of the trunk according to a respectful pruning leads to a loss of harvest 2 years after planting. This is due to the removal, on the future trunk, of the green suckers which carrying bunches. This operation carried out in spring rather than during winter pruning, would promote a better leaf / fruit balance when the plant comes into production, and could lead to better hydraulic conduction in the vessels of the trunk. Maintaining these trials for several years will provide more robust data to assess the impact of these practices on the vines over the long term.

Grapevine yield estimation in a context of climate change: the GraY model

Grapevine yield is a key indicator to assess the impacts of climate change and the relevance of adaptation strategies in a vineyard landscape. At this scale, a yield model should use a number of parameters and input data in relation to the information available and be able to reproduce vineyard management decisions (e.g. soil and canopy management, irrigation). In this study, we used data from six experimental sites in Southern France (cv. Syrah) to calibrate a model of grapevine yield limited by water constraint (GraY). Each yield component (bud fertility, number of berries per bunch, berry weight) was calculated as a function of the soil water availability simulated by the WaLIS water balance model at critical phenological phases. The model was then evaluated in 10 grapegrowers’ plots, covering a diversity of biophysical and technical contexts (soil type, canopy size, irrigation, cover crop). We identified three critical periods for yield formation: after flowering on the previous year for the number of bunches and berries, around pre-veraison and post-veraison of the same year for mean berry weight. Yields were simulated with a model efficiency (EF) of 0.62 (NRMSE = 0.28). Bud fertility and number of berries per bunch were more accurately simulated (EF = 0.90 and 0.77, NRMSE = 0.06 and 0.10, respectively) than berry weight (EF = -0.31, NRMSE = 0.17). Model efficiency on the on-farm plots reached 0.71 (NRMSE = 0.37) simulating yields from 1 to 8 kg/plant. The GraY model is an original model estimating grapevine yield evolution on the basis of water availability under future climatic conditions.  It allows to evaluate the effects of various adaptation levers such as planting density, cover crop management, fruit/leaf ratio, shading and irrigation, in various production contexts.

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.

Aromatic maturity is a cornerstone of terroir expression in red wine

Harvesting grapes at adequate maturity is key to the production of high-quality red wines. Enologists and wine makers define several types of maturity, including technical maturity, phenolic maturity and aromatic maturity. Technical maturity and phenolic maturity are relatively well documented in the scientific literature, while articles on aromatic maturity are scarcer. This is surprising, because aromatic maturity is, without a doubt, the most important of the three in determining wine quality and typicity (including terroir expression). Optimal terroir expression can be obtained when the different types of maturity are reached at the same time, or within a short time frame. This is more likely to occur when the ripening takes place under mild temperatures, neither too cool, nor too hot. Aromatic expression in wine can be driven, from low to high maturity, by green, herbal, fresh fruit, ripe fruit, jammy fruit, candied fruit or cooked fruit aromas. Green and cooked fruit aromas are not desirable in red wines, while the levels of other aromatic compounds contribute to the typicity of the wine in relation to its origin. Wines produced in cool climates, or on cool soils in temperate climates, are likely to express herbal or fresh fruit aromas; while wines produced under warm climates, or on warm soils in temperate climates, may express ripe fruit, jammy fruit or candied fruit aromas. Growers can optimize terroir expression through their choice of grapevine variety. Early ripening varieties perform better in cool climates and late ripening varieties in warm climates. Additionally, maturity can be advanced or delayed by different canopy management practices or training systems.