IVAS 2022 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 IVAS 9 IVAS 2022 9 Barrel-to-Barrel Variation of Color and Phenolic Composition in Barrel-Aged Red Wine

Barrel-to-Barrel Variation of Color and Phenolic Composition in Barrel-Aged Red Wine

Abstract

Tangible variation of sensory characteristics is often perceived in wine aged in similar barrels. This variation is mostly explained by differences in the wood chemical composition, and in the production of the barrels. Despite these facts, the literature concerning barrel-to-barrel variation and its effect on wine sensory and chemical characteristics is very scarce [1]. In this study, the barrel-to-barrel variation in barrel-aged wines was examined in respect of the most important phenolic compounds of oenological interest and chromatic characteristics, considering both the effects of the (individual) barrel and cooperage. A red wine was aged in 49 new medium-toasted oak (Quercus petraea) barrels, from four cooperages, for 12 months. The resulting wines were evaluated for chromatic characteristics, anthocyanin-related parameters, total phenols, flavonoids and non-flavonoids phenols, flavanol monomers and oligomeric and polymeric proanthocyanidins [2]. Principal Components Analysis (PCA) and variance analysis (ANOVA) were applied to investigate the relationships between barrels and to assess cooperage and individual barrel effect. Significant differences were observed for phenolic composition and chromatic characteristics in the wines aged in the different barrels, however without significant effect of the cooperage. The barrel-to-barrel variation of chemical parameters depended on each specific parameter and was not uniform. Anthocyanin related parameters showed the highest variation, 25–37%, other phenolics varied 3– 8.5%, and with two exceptions, chromatic characteristics changed 1.7–3% [3]. Cooperages were not shown to differentiate from each other in their internal variation, with relevance for practical application for most of the parameters analyzed in this trial, exception being made for pigments and especially anthocyanin related parameters [3]. The relationship between the number of barrels and the expected variation for each analytical parameter was calculated, as reference for future measurements involving barrel lots, either in wine production or experimental design [3].  

References

[1] Towey J.P., Waterhouse A.L. (1996). Barrel-to-barrel variation of volatile oak extractives in barrel-fermented Chardonnay. Am. J. Enol. Vitic., 47, 17–20.
[2] Sun B., Leandro C., Ricardo Da Silva, J.M., Spranger, I. (1998). Separation of grape and wine proanthocyanidins according to their degree of polymerization. J. Agric. Food Chem., 46, 1390–1396.
[3] Pfahl L., Catarino S., Fontes N., Graça A., Ricardo-da-Silva J. (2021). Effect of barrel-to-barrel variation on color and phenolic composition of a red wine. Foods, 10 (7), 1669. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10071669

DOI:

Publication date: June 24, 2022

Issue: IVAS 2022

Type: Poster

Authors

Pfahl Leonard1, Catarino Sofia1,2, Fontes Natacha3, Graça António3 and Ricardo-da-Silva Jorge1

1LEAF – Linking Landscape, Environment, Agriculture and Food Research Center, Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade de Lisboa. 
2CeFEMA—Center of Physics and Engineering of Advanced Materials, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa
3Sogrape Vinhos S.A.

Contact the author

Keywords

Red wine, oak barrel aging, cooperage, barrel-to-barrel variation, phenolic composition

Tags

IVAS 2022 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

What are the optimal ranges and thresholds for berry solar radiation for flavonoid biosynthesis?

In wine grape production, canopy management practices are applied to control the source-sink balance and improve the cluster microclimate to enhance berry composition. The aim of this study was to identify the optimal ranges of berry solar radiation exposure (exposure) for upregulation of flavonoid biosynthesis and thresholds for their degradation, to evaluate how canopy management practices such as leaf removal, shoot thinning, and a combination of both affect the grapevine (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Cabernet Sauvignon) yield components, berry composition, and flavonoid profile under context of climate change. First experiment assessed changes in the grape flavonoid content driven by four degrees of exposure. In the second experiment, individual grape berries subjected to different exposures were collected from two cultivars (Cabernet Sauvignon and Petit Verdot). The third experiment consisted of an experiment with three canopy management treatments (i) LR (removal of 5 to 6 basal leaves), (ii) ST (thinned to 24 shoots per vine), and (iii) LRST (a combination of LR and ST) and an untreated control (UNT). Berry composition, flavonoid content and profiles, and 3-isobutyl 2-methoxypyrazine were monitored during berry ripening. Although increasing canopy porosity through canopy management practices can be helpful for other purposes, this may not be the case of flavonoid compounds when a certain proportion of kaempferol was achieved. Our results revealed different sensitivities to degradation within the flavonoid groups, flavonols being the only monitored group that was upregulated by solar radiation. Within different canopy management practices, the main effects were due to the ST. Under environmental conditions given in this trial, ST and LRST hastened fruit maturity; however, a clear improvement of the flavonoid compounds (i.e., greater anthocyanin) was not observed at harvest. Methoxypyrazine berry content decreased with canopy management practices studied. Although some berry traits were improved (i.e. 2.5° Brix increase in berry total soluble solids) due to canopy management practices (ST), this resulted in a four-fold increase in labor operations cost, two-fold decrease in yield with a 10-fold increase in anthocyanin production cost per hectare that should be assessed together as the climate continues to get hot.

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.

Heatwaves and grapevine yield in the Douro region, crop model simulations

Heatwaves or extreme heat events can be particularly harmful to agriculture. Grapevines grown in the Douro winemaking region are particularly exposed to this threat, due to the specificities of the already warm and dry climatic conditions. Furthermore, climate change simulations point to an increase in the frequency of occurrence of these extreme heat events, therefore posing a major challenge to winegrowers in the Mediterranean type climates. The current study focuses on the application of the STICS crop model to assess the potential impacts of heatwaves in grapevine yields over the Douro valley winemaking region. For this purpose, STICS was applied to grapevines using high-resolution weather, soil and terrain datasets over the Douro. To assess the impact of heatwaves, the weather dataset (1989-2005) was artificially modified, generating periods with anomalously high temperatures (+5 ºC), at certain onset dates and with specific durations (from 5 to 9 days). The model was run with this modified weather dataset and results were compared to the original unmodified runs. The results show that heatwaves can have a very strong impact on grapevine yields, strongly depending on the onset dates and duration of the heatwaves. The highest negative impacts may result in a decrease in the yield by up to -35% in some regions. Despite some uncertainties inherent to the current modelling assessment, the present study highlights the negative impacts of heatwaves on viticultural yields in the Douro region, which is critical information for stakeholders within the winemaking sector for planning suitable adaptation measures.

Late frost protection in Champagne

Probably one of the most counterintuitive impacts of climate change on vine is the increased frequency of late frost. Champagne, due to its septentrional position is historically and regularly affected by this meteorological hazard. Champagne has therefore developed a strong experience in frost protection with first experiments dating from the end of 19th century. Frost protection can be divided in two parts: passive and active. Passive protection includes all the methods that do not seek to modify the vine’s environment or resistance at the time of frost. The most iconic passive protection in Champagne is the establishment of the individual reserve. This reserve allows to stock a certain quantity of clear wine during a surplus year to compensate a meteorological hazard like frost during the following years. Other common passive methods are the control of planting area (walls, bushes, topography), the choice of grape variety, late pruning, or the impact of grass cover and tillage. Active frost protection is also divided in two parts. Most of the existing techniques tend to modify vine’s environment. Most of the time they provide warmth (candles, heaters, windmills, heating cables…), or stabilise bud’s temperature above a lethal threshold (water sprinkling). The other way to actively fight is to enhance the resistance of buds to frost (elicitors). The Comité Champagne evaluates frost protection methods following three main axes: the efficiency, the profitability, and the environmental impact through a lifecycle assessment. This study will present the results on both passive and active protection following these three axes.

Evolution of the amino acids content through grape ripening: Effect of foliar application of methyl jasmonate with or without urea

The parameters that determine the grape quality, and therefore the optimal harvest time, suffer variations during berry ripening, related to climate change, with the widely known problem of the gap between technological and phenolic maturities. However, there are few studies about its incidence on grape nitrogen composition. For this reason, the use of an elicitor, methyl jasmonate (MeJ), alone or with urea, is proposed as a tool to reduce climatic decoupling, allowing to establish the harvest time in order to achieve the optimum grape quality. The aim was to study the effect of MeJ and MeJ+Urea foliar applications on the evolution of Tempranillo amino acids content throughout the grape maturation. Three treatments were foliarly applied, at veraison and 7 days later: control (water), MeJ (10 mM) and MeJ+Urea (10 mM+6 kg N/ha). Grape samples were taken at five stages of maturation: day before the first and second applications, 15 days after the second application (pre-harvest), harvest day, and 15 days after harvest (post-harvest). The amino acids analysis of the samples was carried out by HPLC. Results showed that the evolution of amino acids was similar regardless of the treatment; however, foliar applications influenced the nitrogen compounds content, i.e., there was no qualitative effect but quantitative one. Most of the amino acids reached their maximum concentration in pre-harvest, being higher in grapes from the treatments than in the control. In general, no differences in grape amino acids content were observed between MeJ and MeJ+Urea treatments. Foliar applications with MeJ and MeJ+Urea enhanced the grape amino acids content, without affecting their profile, helping to optimize their quality and allowing to establish a more complete grape ripening standard. Therefore, MeJ and MeJ+Urea foliar applications can be a simple agronomic practice, which has shown promising results in order to enhance the grape quality.