New oenological criteria for selecting strains of Lachancea thermotolerans for wine technology

Grapevine pruning is one of the most important practices in the vineyards. Winegrowers use it to provide the vines the shape needed, or to maintain it once achieved, and also to balance vegetative growth and fruit production. In the last decades, careless pruning has been blamed, among other factors, as responsible of the vineyard decay that is been observed even in young vines. However, to our knowledge, there is a lack of systematic research trying to elucidate to which extent the pruning method used affects plant development or its susceptibility to grapevine trunk diseases (GTD). Within this context, the aim of this work is to study the influence of different pruning method strategies on the development of field-planted young vines.

The global warming phenomenon involves the frequency of extreme meteorological events accompanied by a change in rainfall distribution. Irrigation frequency (IF) affects the spatial and temporal soil water distribution but its effects on the phenolic composition of the grape have been scarcely studied. The aim of this work was to evaluate the effects of four deficit irrigation frequencies of 30 % ETo: one irrigation per day (T01), two irrigations per week (T03), one irrigation per week (T07) and one irrigation every two weeks (T15) on berry phenolic composition at harvest.

Grape quality potential for wine production is strongly influenced by environmental parameters and agronomic factors. Several studies underline the rootstock effect on scions vegetative growth and berry composition [1] with an impact on wine quality. Rootstocks are promising agronomic tools for climate change adaptation and in most grape-growing regions the potential diversity of rootstocks is not fully used and only a few genotypes are planted. Moreover, little is known about the effect of rootstock genetic variability on the aromatic composition in wines.

Top quality sparkling wines (SW) are mostly produced using the traditional method that implies a second fermentation into the bottle[1]. That is the case of sparkling wines of reputed AOC such as Champagne, Cava or Franciacorta. However, it seems that the first SW was elaborated using the ancestral method in which only one fermentation takes place[2]. That is the case of the classical SW from the AOC Blanquette de Limoux[3]. In both cases, SW age in the bottle during some time in contact with lees favoring yeast’s autolysis[4]. There is a lot of information about traditional method but only few exists about ancestral method. The aim of this work was to compare SW made by the ancestral method with SW made by the traditional method.

The use of oenological additives is becoming a common practice due to the technological and sensory properties they provide to the wines. However, the number of studies focused on the impact that these additives might induce on wine flavor perception during wine tasting is still quite scarce. The aim of this work was to evaluate the effect of three different types of common oenological additives: two oenotannins (ellagitannin and gallotannin) and a commercial preparation of yeast mannoproteins on the long-lasting flavor perception (aroma and astringency).