WAC 2022 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 WAC 9 WAC 2022 9 3 - WAC - Posters 9 Influence of cork density upon cork stopper resiliency after opening a sparkling wine bottle

Influence of cork density upon cork stopper resiliency after opening a sparkling wine bottle

Abstract

After Champagne popping, the first consumer’s observation is the shape of the cork stopper. Consumers expect a “mushroom shape”. Nevertheless, we sometimes observe a “barrel” shape due to inappropriate cork’s elastic properties. The aim of this study was to follow the loss of cork stopper resiliency during 26 months according to the density (d) of the cork in contact with the wine. 1680 disks were weighed + measured and divided in 6 density classes: High (H1 d= 0,19 g/cm3 – H2 d= 0,21 g/cm3), Medium (M, not studied) and Low (L1 d= 0,13 g/cm3 – L2 d= 0,14 g/cm3). Then, 138 technical cork stoppers were produced for each of the 4 studied groups. These corks consisted of an agglomerated natural cork granule body to which two natural cork disks were glued. A total of 552 bottles of sparkling wine were closed with these corks and open after 13, 19 and 26 months to follow cork resiliencies. Wine bottles were stored horizontally; thus, the external natural cork disks were in contact to the wine. During the 26 months of the study, highly significant differences (ANOVA) were observed between the resiliencies of H-corks and those of L-corks, whatever the time studied. The diameters of the L-corks were statistically higher than those of the H-corks. No significant differences were observed between L1 and L2 corks. At the opposite, differences were noted betweenThomas Salmon H1 and H2 at 19 and 26 months. This could be explained by the heterogeneity of the resiliency that was higher for H-corks than for L-corks. Finally, the corks were visually (12 judges) divided in 3 classes corresponding to high (expected mushroom shape, i.e high resiliency), medium (irregular shape of the disk in contact with the wine and/or low premature deterioration of the expected resiliency) and low qualities (barrel shape = premature deterioration of the resiliency). The corks were also divided in 3 categories corresponding to 0-33%, 34-66% and 67-100% resiliency. A strong correlation was noted between the visual and the instrumental categorizations. This study strongly evidenced 1) the importance of the cork density on the cork stopper behaviour when opening the bottle and 2) the interest of an instrumental approach reflecting the consumer’s perception.

DOI:

Publication date: June 27, 2022

Issue: WAC 2022

Type: Article

Authors

Thomas Salmon, Jordi Rosello, Alexandre Marcoult, Chantal Prat, Richard Marchal

Presenting author

Thomas Salmon – University of Reims Champagne-Ardenne – University of Haute-Alsace

Francisco Oller S. A. Cassà de la Selva, Province of Girona, Spain | Oller & Cie – SIBEL, Reims, France | Francisco Oller S. A. Cassà de la Selva, Province of Girona, Spain | Laboratoire d’Oenologie, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Reims – Université de Haute-Alsace, Colmar, France, ,

Contact the author

Keywords

cork stopper, cork density, resiliency, sparkling wine, visual categorization

Tags

IVES Conference Series | WAC 2022

Citation

Related articles…

Making sense of available information for climate change adaptation and building resilience into wine production systems across the world

Effects of climate change on viticulture systems and winemaking processes are being felt across the world. The IPCC 6thAssessment Report concluded widespread and rapid changes have occurred, the scale of recent changes being unprecedented over many centuries to many thousands of years. These changes will continue under all emission scenarios considered, including increases in frequency and intensity of hot extremes, heatwaves, heavy precipitation and droughts. Wine companies need tools and models allowing to peer into the future and identify the moment for intervention and measures for mitigation and/or avoidance. Previously, we presented conceptual guidelines for a 5-stage framework for defining adaptation strategies for wine businesses. That framework allows for direct comparison of different solutions to mitigate perceived climate change risks. Recent global climatic evolution and multiple reports of severe events since then (smoke taint, heatwave and droughts, frost, hail and floods, rising sea levels) imply urgency in providing effective tools to tackle the multiple perceived risks. A coordinated drive towards a higher level of resilience is therefore required. Recent publications such as the Australian Wine Future Climate Atlas and results from projects such as H2020 MED-GOLD inform on expected climate change impacts to the wine sector, foreseeing the climate to expect at regional and vineyard scale in coming decades. We present examples of practical application of the Climate Change Adaptation Framework (CCAF) to impacts affecting wine production in two wine regions: Barossa (Australia) and Douro (Portugal). We demonstrate feasibility of the framework for climate adaptation from available data and tools to estimate historical climate-induced profitability loss, to project it in the future and to identify critical moments when disruptions may occur if timely measures are not implemented. Finally, we discuss adaptation measures and respective timeframes for successful mitigation of disruptive risk while enhancing resilience of wine systems.

Second pruning as a strategy to delay maturation in cv. ‘Touriga nacional’ in the Portuguese Douro region

The advance in maturation of wine grapes is an important climate change risk related effect that could affect warm regions like Portuguese Douro Wine Region. Indeed, the climate analysis over the past years registered a decrease in the precipitation, significant higher average temperatures, and a more frequent occurrence of extreme weather events, including heat waves. In these conditions the length from anthesis until maturation is shortened and the uncoupling of technical and phenolic maturity results in berries with higher sugar concentration (and lower acidity), but lower anthocyanins, tannins, and total phenolic concentration, which produce unbalanced wines.
In this work, an innovative strategy of crop forcing, based on forcing vine regrowth after a second pruning of green shoots, was tested, aimed at delaying ripening until the temperature becomes lower and, therefore, preventing acidity loss and increasing anthocyanin-to-sugar ratio. The experiments were conducted in 2019 and 2020 in a commercial vineyard of ‘Touriga Nacional’ located in the Douro Region. Crop forcing was conducted 15 (CF1) to 30 (CF2) days after fruit set. Vines pruned with conventional methods were used as control (CF0). Results confirmed that fruit ripening was shifted from the hot season (August/September), until a cooler period (October through early-November). At harvest, grapevine berries from CF1 and CF2 presented lower pH and higher acidity, than control, with no significant differences in colour intensity and phenolic levels composition. Sugar content was lower in CF2-treated vines in both seasons. However, in CF-treated vines the number and size of clusters were significantly lower (up to 88% reduction) than in control plants. A metabolomics analysis of mature berries from CF-treated vines and control is underway. Crop forcing was indeed effective in producing a more balance berry composition but severely reduced grapevine yield,

Climate, Viticulture, and Wine … my how things have changed!

The planet is warmer than at any time in our recorded past and increasing greenhouse emissions and persistence in the climate system means that continued warming is highly likely. Climate change has already altered the basic framework of growing grapes for wine production worldwide and will likely continue to do so for years to come. The wine sector can continue to play an important role in leading the agricultural sector in addressing climate change. From developing on…

Local adaptation tools to ensure the viticultural sustainability in a changing climate

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.19.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

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.