IVAS 2022 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 IVAS 9 IVAS 2022 9 Assyrtiko wines of Santorini produced by different autochthonous yeasts: Differences in aromatic and organoleptic profiles

Assyrtiko wines of Santorini produced by different autochthonous yeasts: Differences in aromatic and organoleptic profiles

Abstract

Different yeasts were isolated from spontaneous fermentation of Assyrtiko grape must in Santorini Island, Greece. Molecular typing revealed the presence of three Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains (S9, S13, S24) and one strain of the yeast species Nakazawaea ishiwadae (N.i). The four isolated strains were further tested in laboratory scale fermentations of Assyrtiko must in pure inoculation cultures and in sequential inoculation (72 hours) of each S. cerevisiae strain with the strain of N. ishiwadae. All fermentation trials were realised in duplicate.

 Fermentation kinetics were followed by HPLC, while the volatile composition of the final products was determined by GC-MS (qualitative analysis) and GC-FID (quantitative analysis). Sensory evaluation of the samples took place by a panel of 10 trained panellists. In general, the fermentation rate in trials with S.13 and N.i. was lower than the rest, while trials with S9 and S24 resulted in higher ethanol contents in the final product but without statistically important differences. The wines fermented with the S24 and N.i. strains were characterised by the highest concentrations of acetic acid (0.9 and 0.7 g/L respectively) and with S13 by the highest concentration of glycerol (15g/L). In terms of aromatic profile, the trials contacted with S9 were up to 3.5-folds richer in volatile compounds responsible for the fruity character in wines. In addition, the fermentations with S13 and N.i. were about 3-folds richer in compounds characterized by floral character (e.g. phenethyl alcohol, tyrosol etc.), while the most abundant group of compounds in fermentations contacted with S24 strain were the oxidation esters (e.g. ethyl hydrogen succinate). In the sequential inoculations apart from a delay in the completion of alcoholic fermentations, a comparable with single strains fermentations trend in ethanol production and reducing sugar consumption was observed. Intensification of the production of acetic acid, oxidation esters, several ethyl esters and higher alcohols (C5, C6) was also observed. Significantly lower (5-fold) contents of higher alcohols and their corresponding esters, responsible for floral aromas for ferments with N13 compared to ferments with S13 was also noted. Regarding the production of esters responsible for tropical and citrus aromas (e.g. isoamyl acetate, ethyl hexanoate), the highest content was observed in ferments with N13 (1.32 ppm) and N24 (1.97 ppm) while the lowest in ferments with N9 (0.99 ppm). The concentration of most esters was increased for all trials after sequential inoculation compared to the corresponding trials contacted with pure cultures.  The results from the organoleptic analysis are in line with the chemical analysis. Even though, all four newly isolated strains have the ability to ferment and produce dry wines, the most preferred wines by the panel were those produced by S9 and S13 strains.

DOI:

Publication date: June 27, 2022

Issue: IVAS 2022

Type: Poster

Authors

Kallithraka Stamatina1, Christofi Stefania1, Dimopoulou Maria1, Tsapou Evangelia Anastasia1 and Papanikolaou Seraphim1

1Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition, Laboratory of enology and alcoholic drinks, Agricultural University of Athens 

Contact the author

Keywords

Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Nakazawaea ishiwadae, wine volatile content, sensory analysis, fermentation kinetics

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.

Terroir analysis and its complexity

Terroir is not only a geographical site, but it is a more complex concept able to express the “collective knowledge of the interactions” between the environment and the vines mediated through human action and “providing distinctive characteristics” to the final product (OIV 2010). It is often treated and accepted as a “black box”, in which the relationships between wine and its origin have not been clearly explained. Nevertheless, it is well known that terroir expression is strongly dependent on the physical environment, and in particular on the interaction between soil-plant and atmosphere system, which influences the grapevine responses, grapes composition and wine quality. The Terroir studying and mapping are based on viticultural zoning procedures, obtained with different levels of know-how, at different spatial and temporal scales, empiricism and complexity in the description of involved bio-physical processes, and integrating or not the multidisciplinary nature of the terroir. The scientific understanding of the mechanisms ruling both the vineyard variability and the quality of grapes is one of the most important scientific focuses of terroir research. In fact, this know-how is crucial for supporting the analysis of climate change impacts on terroir resilience, identifying new promised lands for viticulture, and driving vineyard management toward a target oenological goal. In this contribution, an overview of the last findings in terroir studies and approaches will be shown with special attention to the terroir resilience analysis to climate change, facing the use and abuse of terroir concept and new technology able to support it and identifying the terroir zones.

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.

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.

Soil, vine, climate change – what is observed – what is expected

To evaluate the current and future impact of climate change on Viticulture requires an integrated view on a complex interacting system within the soil-plant-atmospheric continuum under continuous change. Aside of the globally observed increase in temperature in basically all viticulture regions for at least four decades, we observe several clear trends at the regional level in the ratio of precipitation to potential evapotranspiration. Additionally the recently published 6th assessment report of the IPCC (The physical science basis) shows case-dependent further expected shifts in climate patterns which will have substantial impacts on the way we will conduct viticulture in the decades to come.
Looking beyond climate developments, we observe rising temperatures in the upper soil layers which will have an impact on the distribution of microbial populations, the decay rate of organic matter or the storage capacity for carbon, thus affecting the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and the viscosity of water in the soil-plant pathway, altering the transport of water. If the upper soil layers dry out faster due to less rainfall and/or increased evapotranspiration driven by higher temperatures, the spectral reflection properties of bare soil change and the transport of latent heat into the fruiting zone is increased putting a higher temperature load on the fruit. Interactions between micro-organisms in the rhizosphere and the grapevine root system are poorly understood but respond to environmental factors (such as increased soil temperatures) and the plant material (rootstock for instance), respectively the cultivation system (for example bio-organic versus conventional). This adds to an extremely complex system to manage in terms of increased resilience, adaptation to and even mitigation of climate change. Nevertheless, taken as a whole, effects on the individual expressions of wines with a given origin, seem highly likely to become more apparent.