WAC 2022 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 WAC 9 WAC 2022 9 3 - WAC - Posters 9 Influence of the temperature of the prise de mousse on the effervescence and foam of Champagne and sparkling wines.

Influence of the temperature of the prise de mousse on the effervescence and foam of Champagne and sparkling wines.

Abstract

The persistence of effervescence and foam collar during a Champagne or sparkling wine tasting constitute one, among others, specific consumer preference for these products. Many different factors related to the product or to the tasting conditions might influence their behavior in the glass. However, the underlying factor behind the fizziness of these wines involves a second in-bottle alcoholic fermentation, also well known as the prise de mousse. In France, from a regulatory point of view, there is no obligation to conduct the prise de mousse at a specific temperature. Only historical references mention the advantages of using cellars dug in the tuffeau of the Loire or in the chalk in the Champagne area, to develop the production of Crémant de Loire and Champagne, and above all to conduct a slow prise de mousse at a low temperature

The aim of this study was to assess whether a low temperature (13°C) or a high temperature (20°C) during the in-bottle fermentation might have an impact on the effervescence and the foaming properties (i.e., collar height and bubble size) of French sparkling wines. Two batches of wines were used: one Crémant de Loire and one Champagne wine. Three months after bottling, a campaign of instrumental and sensory analysis was carried out on these wines.

Our results showed that the champagne wine elaborated at 13°C and served in standard tasting conditions (i.e., engraved flute, 100 mL, 18°C) had better ability to keep the dissolved CO2 in the liquid phase than the one elaborated at 20°C. Most interestingly, we also observed, for the Crémant de Loire and the Champagne wine, that the lower the temperature of the prise de mousse, the smaller the bubbles in the foam collar during the ten minutes following the pouring process.

Finally, sensory analyses were performed by a panel of ten wine experts in order to reveal potential differences according to the temperature of the prise de mousse. Interestingly, a triangle test also showed a significant difference between the Champagne wine elaborated at 13°C and the one elaborated at 20°C.

Further experiments are under investigation to confirm these results on Champagne wine and sparkling wines aged during a longer period. A detailed knowledge of the chemical and biochemical differences between the sparkling wines elaborated at 13°C and 20°C may help to better understand the different behaviors observed in this study.

DOI:

Publication date: June 27, 2022

Issue: WAC 2022

Type: Article

Authors

Clara, Cilindre, Silvia, Bassi, Céline, Henrion, Barbara, Poty, Marie, Angot, Jacques Emmanuel, Barbier, Bertrand, Robillard, Gérard, Liger-Belair

Presenting author

Clara, Cilindre – Equipe Effervescence (GSMA – UMR CNRS 7331), Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, BP 1039, Reims, France.

Equipe Effervescence (GSMA – UMR CNRS 7331), Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, BP 1039, Reims, France | Institut Œnologique de Champagne (IOC), Mardeuil, France | Equipe Effervescence (GSMA – UMR CNRS 7331), Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, BP 1039, Reims, France | Equipe Effervescence (GSMA – UMR CNRS 7331), Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, BP 1039, Reims, France., Jacques Emmanuel, Barbier | Institut Œnologique de Champagne (IOC), Mardeuil, France., Bertrand, Robillard | Institut Œnologique de Champagne (IOC), Mardeuil, France., Gérard, Liger-Belair | Equipe Effervescence (GSMA – UMR CNRS 7331), Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, BP 1039, Reims, France.

Contact the author

Keywords

Prise de mousse – temperature – CO2 – bubbles – sparkling wine tasting

Tags

IVES Conference Series | WAC 2022

Citation

Related articles…

Modelling vine water stress during a critical period and potential yield reduction rate in European wine regions: a retrospective analysis

Most European vineyards are managed under rainfed conditions, where seasonal water deficit has become increasingly important. The flowering-veraison phenophase represents an important period for vine response to water stress, which is seldomly thoroughly evaluated. Therefore, we aim to quantify the flowering-veraison water stress levels using Crop Water Stress Indicator (CWSI) over 1986–2015 for important European wine regions, and to assess the respective potential Yield Lose Rate (YLR). Additionally, we also investigate whether an advanced flowering-veraison phase may help alleviating the water stress with improved yield. A process-based grapevine model STICS is employed, which has been extensively calibrated for flowering and veraison stages using observed data at 38 locations with 10 different grapevine varieties. Subsequently, the model is being implemented at the regional level, considering site-specific calibration results and gridded climate and soil datasets. The findings suggest wine regions with stronger flowering-veraison CWSI tend to have higher potential YLR. However, contrasting patterns are found between wine regions in France-Germany-Luxembourg and Italy-Portugal-Spain. The former tends to have slight-to-moderate drought conditions (CWSI<0.5) and a negligible-to-moderate YLR (<30%), whereas the latter possesses severe-to-extreme CWSI (>0.5) and substantial YLR (>40%). Wine regions prone to a high drought risk (CWSI>0.75) are also identified, which are concentrated in southern Mediterranean Europe. An advanced flowering-veraison phase may have benefited from cooler temperatures and a higher fraction of spring precipitation in wine regions of Italy-Portugal-Spain, resulting in alleviated CWSI and moderate reductions of YLR. For those of France-Germany-Luxembourg, this can have reduced flowering-veraison precipitation, but prevalent alleviations of YLR are also found, possibly because of shifted phase towards a cooler growing season with reduced evaporative demands. Overall, such a retrospective analysis might provide new insights towards better management of seasonal water deficit for conventionally vulnerable Mediterranean wine regions, but also for relatively cooler and wetter Central European regions.

Is wine terroir a valid concept under a changing climate?

The OIV[i] defines terroir as a concept referring to an area in which collective knowledge of the interactions between the physical and biological environment (soil, topography, climate, landscape characteristics and biodiversity features) and vitivinicultural practices develops, providing distinctive wine characteristics. Those are perceptible in the taste of wine, which drives consumer preference and, therefore, wine’s value in the marketplace. Geographical indications (GI) are recognized regulatory constructs formalizing and protecting the nexus between wine taste and the terroir generating it. Despite considering updates, GIs do not consider the nexus as a dynamic one and do not anticipate change, namely of climate. Being climate a fundamental feature of terroir, it strongly impacts wine characteristics, such as taste. According to IPCC[ii], many widespread, rapid and unprecedented changes of climate occurred, some being irreversible over hundreds to thousands of years. Climatic shifts and atmospheric-driven extreme events have been widely reported worldwide. Recent climatic trends are projected to strengthen in upcoming decades, whereas extremes are expected to increase in frequency and intensity, forcing wines away from GI definitions. Geographical shifts of viticultural suitability are projected, often moving into regions and countries different from current ones. Some authors propose adaptation in viticulture, winemaking and product innovation. We show evidence of climate changing wine characteristics in the Douro valley, home of 270-year-old Port GI. We discuss herein resist or adapt stances for when climate changes the nexus between terroir and wine characteristics. Using the MED-GOLD[iii] dashboard, a tool allowing for easy visual navigation of past and future climates, we demonstrate how policymakers can identify future moments, throughout the 21st century under different emission scenarios, when GI specifications will likely need updates (e.g., boundaries, varieties) to reduce climate-change impacts.

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.

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.

The use of rootstock as a lever in the face of climate change and dieback of vineyard

As viticulture faces challenges such as climate change or vineyard dieback, the choice of the variety and rootstock becomes more and more crucial. To study rootstock levers in the Bordeaux region, a parcel of Cabernet Sauvignon (CS) was planted with four rootstocks in 2014. Twenty repetitions of each of the following four rootstocks were set up: 101-14 MGt, Nemadex AB, 420A MGt and Gravesac. The number of bunches, yields and pruning weights of the vine shoots were measured individually on 240 vines from 2017 to 2021. Since 2020, nitrogen status assessed by assimilable nitrogen level, hydric status assessed by δ13C and berry maturity were measured on 80 samples taken from 20 repetitions of the four rootstocks. A lower yield was measured for CS grafted onto Nemadex AB due to the lower number of bunches and the lower weight of berries. The differences between the other three rootstocks are small, but CS grafted onto 420A MGt was the most productive. The CS grafted onto Nemadex AB had the lowest pruning weight while 101-14 MGt had the highest. In 2020, δ13C showed a more moderate water stress with 101-14 MGt and 420A MGt than with Nemadex AB. Surprisingly, the Gravesac was under more stress than the 101-14 MGt. The nitrogen status in the berries was better for Nemadex AB but this was perhaps due to the significantly lower weight of the berries.Rootstock 101-14 MGt attained the highest accumulation of sugars in the berries while 420A MGt allows to preserve higher acidity. The parcel is still young which may explain some of the results. These measures must therefore be continued over the next several years to fully assess the effects of these rootstocks on the development of the vines and the quality of the production under new climatic conditions.