terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 International Congress on Grapevine and Wine Sciences 9 2ICGWS-2023 9 Oenococcus oeni clonal diversity in the carbonic maceration winemaking

Oenococcus oeni clonal diversity in the carbonic maceration winemaking

Abstract

This essay was aimed to describe the clonal diversity of Oenococcus oeni in the malolactic fermentation of the carbonic maceration (CM) winemaking. The free and the pressed liquids from CM were sampled and compared to the wine from a standard winemaking with previous destemming and crushing (DC) of grapes [1].O. oeni strain typification was performed by PFGE as González-Arenzana et al. described (2014) [2].  Results showed that 13 genotypes, referred as to letters, were distinguished from the 49 isolated strains, meaning the genotype “a” the 27%, the “b” the 14%, the “c” the 12%, the “d and e” the 10 % each other, and the remaining ones less than the 8% each one. In the traditional winemaking by DC 3 genotypes were found, while in the free liquid of CM were 4 the clones and in the pressed CM wine were 9 (Figure 1). These results demonstrated that the CM winemaking favoured the O. oeni strains diversity, being the pressed fraction 3 times more diverse than DC winemaking, probably due to the breakage of the biofilms formed during the CM at the press moment or because the special environmental.

Figure 1. Percentage of detection of the Oenococcus oeni genotypes named with letters, in the destemming and crushing vinifications and in the free and pressed liquids from carbonic maceration.

Acknowledgements: This study has been financed from the Project RTI2018-096051-R-C31/C33 (MCIU/AEI/FEDER; UE).

References:

1)  Gutiérrez A.R. et al. (2022) Influence of microbial population on the characteristics of carbonic maceration wines LWT-Food Sci. Tech., 166, DOI  10.1016/j.lwt.2022.113783

2)  González-Arenzana L. et al. (2014) Oenococcus oeni strain typification by combination of Multilocus Sequence Typing and Pulsed Field Gel Electrophoresis analysis. Food Microbiol., 38 : 295-302, DOI 10.1016/j.fm.2013.07.014.

DOI:

Publication date: October 10, 2023

Issue: ICGWS 2023

Type: Poster

Authors

L. González-Arenzana1*, I. López-Alfaro, B. Larreina1, P. Garijo1, P. Santamaría1 and A. R. Gutiérrez1

1 ICVV, Instituto de Ciencias de la Vid y el Vino Universidad de La Rioja, Gobierno de La Rioja, CSIC, Finca La Grajera, Ctra. LO-20- salida 13, 26071, Logroño, Spain  

Contact the author*

Keywords

Oenococcus oeni, carbonic maceration, genotypes

Tags

2ICGWS | ICGWS | ICGWS 2023 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Investigation of cellulose nanofiber-based films used as a protective layer to reduce absorption of smoke phenols into wine grapes

Volatile phenols from wildfire smoke are absorbed by wine grapes, resulting in undesirable smoky and ashy sensory attributes in the affected wine.[1] Unfortunately the severity of wildfires is increasing, particularly when grapes are ripening on the vine. The unwanted flavors of the wine prompted a need for solutions to prevent the uptake of smoke compounds into wine grapes. Films using cellulose nanofibers as the coating forming matrix were developed as an innovative means to prevent smoke phenols from entering Pinot noir grapes. Different film formulations were tested by incorporating low methoxy pectin or chitosan.

Exploring relationships among grapevine chemical and physiological parameters and mycobiome composition under drought stress

Improving our knowledge on biotic and abiotic factors that influence the composition of the grapevine mycobiome is of great agricultural significance, due to potential effects on plant health, productivity, and wine characteristics. Among the various environmental factors affecting the morphological, physiological, biochemical and molecular attributes of grapevine, drought stress is one of the most severe, becoming increasingly an issue worldwide.

Development of a new method for detecting acetic acid bacteria in wine

The presence of acetic acid bacteria in wine can lead to the appearance of acetic acid at concentrations above the perception threshold, causing the wine rejection by the consumer. During the winemaking process, avoiding the presence of acetic acid bacteria is very difficult, as there is always a residual population accompanying the wine[1], and the problem arises with the significant development of these microorganisms that metabolizes large amounts of acetic acid.
The concern of wineries to control the presence of acetic acid bacteria in wines during their conservation is due to the absence of simple and effective analyses that allow the detection of these microorganisms in the initial stages.

Adsorption of tetraconazole by organic residues and vineyard organically-amended soils 

Spain is the country with the largest wine-producing area in the EU and its productivity is largely controlled applying fungicides. However, residues of these compounds can move and contaminate surface and groundwater. The objective of this work was to evaluate the capacity of bioadsorbents from different origin to adsorb and immobilize tetraconazole by themselves or when applied as organic soil amendment, and to prevent soil and water contamination by this fungicide. The adsorption of tetraconazole by 3 organic residues: spent mushroom substrate (SMS), green compost (GC) and vine pruning sawdust (VP), as well as by vineyard soils unamended and amended individually with these residues at 1.5% (w/w) was evaluated using the batch equilibrium technique.

Grapevine cane pruning extract enhances plant physiological capacities and decreases phenolic accumulation in canes and leaves 

Vine cane extracts are a valuable byproduct due to their rich content of polyphenols, vitamins, and other beneficial compounds, which can affect and benefit the vine and the grapes. This study aims to evaluate the response of grapevine plants to irrigation with water supplemented with a vine cane extract, both at physiology response and phenolic composition in different parts of the plant (root, trunk, shoot, leaf, and berry).
Cane extract was obtained by macerating crushed pruning residues with warm water (5:1) and pectolytic enzymes. Two-year-old potted plants were irrigated with water (Control) while others were irrigated with cane extracts, either at 1:4 (w/v, cane extract/water; T 1:4) or at 1:8 (w/v, cane extract/water; T 1:8).