IVAS 2022 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 IVAS 9 IVAS 2022 9 Effect of different pH values on the interaction between yeast mannoproteins and grape seed flavanols

Effect of different pH values on the interaction between yeast mannoproteins and grape seed flavanols

Abstract

The consequences of the global climate change in the vitiviniculture are revealed as a gap between phenolic and technological grape maturities, higher grape sugar concentration that leads to high wine alcohols levels, lower acidities and high pH values, among others. The unbalanced phenolic maturity caused in this scenario leads to harsh astringency and to instable colour of wines. Previous studies have reported that the addition of yeast mannoproteins (MPs) to wines may have positive effects on these two organoleptic properties due to their capability to interact with wine polyphenols [1]; however, studies about the effect of the pH on these interactions have not been carried out so far.

 MPs are located in the outer layer of yeast cell wall (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and they are naturally released into the wine during alcoholic fermentation when yeast is actively growing or during aging when cell wall breaks down in the process known as autolysis. Also, commercial MPs can be added during winemaking and/or ageing. The aim of this work was to study the effect of different pH values (pH 3.0 and 4.0) on the interactions between a flavanol extract from Vitis vinifera L. Tempranillo seeds and the MPs obtained from Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Here, the isolation of MPs from the cell walls of S. cerevisiae was performed using Zymolyase 20T enzyme. MPs were purified by using ethanol, temperature and dialysis. The obtained MPs were characterized by SDS-PAGE and their molecular weights (MWs) were determined by HRSEC-RID [2]. The protein percentage was determined by the Lowry method. The monosaccharide composition was determined by HPLC-MS after derivatisation with 1-phenyl-3-methyl-5-pyrazolone (PMP) [3]. Four main MP fractions were identified: F1 (~2%), with a MW 528.8 kDa, F2 (~12%) (174.1 kDa), F3 (~61 %) (61.0 kDa) and F4 (~25 %) (<10 kDa). The MP–flavanol interactions were performed at pH=3 and pH=4 and studied by means of HPLC-DAD-MS, HRSEC-RID and Isothermal Titration Calorimetry (ITC). The results showed noticeably differences in the interactions between the MPs fractions and the flavanol extract depending on the pH values. 

References

[1] C. Alcalde-Eon, et al. (2019). Food Res. Int., 126; 108650.
[2] E. Manjón, et al. (2020). J. Agric. Food Chem. 25; 13459
[3] Y. Ruiz-García et al. (2014). Carbohydr Polym. 114; 102.

DOI:

Publication date: June 27, 2022

Issue: IVAS 2022

Type: Poster

Authors

Manjón Elvira1, Bosch-Crespo Diana Marelys1, Dueñas Montserrat1 and Escribano-Bailón Mará Teresa1

1Department of Analytical Chemistry, Nutrition and Food Science, Universidad de Salamanca.

Contact the author

Keywords

Saccharomyces cerevisiae, climate change, mannoproteins, flavanols, astringency.

Tags

IVAS 2022 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Grapevine yield-gap: identification of environmental limitations by soil and climate zoning in Languedoc-Roussillon region (south of France)

Grapevine yield has been historically overlooked, assuming a strong trade-off between grape yield and wine quality. At present, menaced by climate change, many vineyards in Southern France are far from the quality label threshold, becoming grapevine yield-gaps a major subject of concern. Although yield-gaps are well studied in arable crops, we know very little about grapevine yield-gaps. In the present study, we analysed the environmental component of grapevine yield-gaps linked to climate and soil resources in the Languedoc Roussillon. We used SAFRAN data and IGP Pays d’Oc wine yields from 2010 to 2018. We selected climate and soil indicators proving to have a significant effect on average wine yield-gaps at the municipality scale. The most significant factors of grapevine yield were the Soil Available Water Capacity; followed by the Huglin Index and the Climatic Dryness Index. The Days of Frost; the Soil pH; and the Very Hot Days were also significant. Then, we clustered geographical zones presenting similar indicators, facilitating the identification of resources yield-gaps. We discussed the number of zones with the experts of IGP Pays d’Oc label, obtaining 7 zones with similar limitations for grapevine yield. Finally, we analysed the main resources causing yield-gaps and the grapevine varieties planted on each zone. Mapping grapevine resource yield-gaps are the first stage for understanding grapevine yield-gaps at the regional scale.

‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ (Vitis vinifera L.) berry skin flavonol and anthocyanin composition is affected by trellis systems and applied water amounts

Trellis systems are selected in wine grape vineyards to mainly maximize vineyard yield and maintain berry quality. This study was conducted in 2020 and 2021 to evaluate six commonly utilized trellis systems including a vertical shoot positioning (VSP), two relaxed VSPs (VSP60 and VSP80), a single high wire (SH), a high quadrilateral (HQ), and a guyot (GY), combined with three levels of irrigation regimes based on different crop evapotranspiration (ETc) replacements, including a 25% ETc, 50% ETc, and 100% ETc. The results indicated SH yielded the most fruits and accumulated the most total soluble solids (TSS) at harvest in 2020, however, it showed the lowest TSS in the second season. In 2020, SH and HQ showed higher concentrations in most of the anthocyanin derivatives compared to the VSPs. Similar comparisons were noticed in 2021 as well. SH and HQ also accumulated more flavonols in both years compared to other trellis systems. Overall, this study provides information on the efficacy of trellis systems on grapevine yield and berry flavonoid accumulation in a currently warming climate.

The impact of sustainable management regimes on amino acid profiles in grape juice, grape skin flavonoids, and hydroxycinnamic acids

One of the biggest challenges of agriculture today is maintaining food safety and food quality while providing ecosystem services such as biodiversity conservation, pest and disease control, ensuring water quality and supply, and climate regulation. Organic farming was shown to promote biodiversity and carbon sequestration, and is therefore seen as one possibility of environmentally friendly production. Consumers expect organically grown crops to be free from chemical pesticides and mineral fertilizers and often presume that the quality of organically grown crops is different or higher compared to conventionally grown crops. Integrated, organic, and biodynamic viticulture were compared in a replicated field trial in Geisenheim, Germany (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Riesling). Amino acid profiles in juice, grape skin flavonoids, and hydroxycinnamic acids were monitored over three consecutive seasons beginning 7 years after conversion to organic and biodynamic viticulture, respectively. In addition, parameters such as soil nutrient status, yield, vigor, canopy temperature, and water stress were monitored to draw conclusions on reasons for the observed changes. Results revealed that the different sustainable management regimes highly differed in their amino acid profiles in juice and also in their skin flavonol content, whereas differences in the flavanol and hydroxycinnamic acid content were less pronounced. It is very likely that differences in nutrient status and yield determined amino acid profiles in juice, although all three systems showed similar amounts of mineralized nitrogen in the soil. Canopy structure and temperature in the bunch zone did not differ among treatments and therefore cannot account for the observed differences in favonols. A different light exposure of the bunches in the respective systems due to differences in vigor together with differences in berry size and a different water status of the vines might rather be responsible for the increase in flavonol content under organic and biodynamic viticulture.

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.

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.