terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 International Congress on Grapevine and Wine Sciences 9 2ICGWS-2023 9 Comparison of ancestral and traditional methods in the elaboration of sparkling wines; preliminary results

Comparison of ancestral and traditional methods in the elaboration of sparkling wines; preliminary results

Abstract

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.

A grape must of Macabeo was fermented and when density was around 1005, it was separated in two sets. One was maintained in the tank until the end of fermentation whereas the other was cooled, filtered to reduce the yeast’s population and bottled for elaborating SW by ancestral method. The other set was used once alcoholic fermentation was finished for elaborating SW by traditional method.

As expected, the ethanol content of ancestral SW was around 1.5 % lower than that of traditional SW since it was not supplemented with sugar for the 2nd fermentation. No differences were found in titratable acidity, volatile acidity, pH or in protein content. However, the polysaccharide concentration was higher in the case of traditional SW which suggest a higher impact of yeast’s autolysis. In contrast, the foamability (HM) was higher in the case of ancestral SW, probably because its lower ethanol content. The wines were tasted by a trained panel which considers both wines positively.

References:

1)  Maujean A. (1989) Histoire de bulles. Rev Franç Enol. 120:11-17.

2)  J. Robinson (ed) (2006) The Oxford Companion to Wine. Third Edition pp. 402–403 Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-860990-6

3)  Dubois C. et al. (1998). Blanquette methode ancestrale. In: Oenologie: Principes scientifiques et technologiques. C. Flanzy (Ed.). Tec & Doc Lavoisier. p. 833.

4)  Pons-Mercadé P. et al. (2021). Monitoring yeast autolysis in sparkling wines of nine consecutive vintages produced by the traditional method. Aust J Grape Wine Res. DOI 10.1111/ajgw.12534

DOI:

Publication date: October 13, 2023

Issue: ICGWS 2023

Type: Poster

Authors

Arnau Just-Borràs1, Ekaterina Moroz1, Pol Giménez1, Pedro Cabanillas1, Jordi Gombau1, Joan M. Canals1, Fernando Zamora1*

1Departament de Bioquímica i Biotecnologia, Facultat d’Enologia de Tarragona, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, C/Marcel.li Domingo s/n, 43007 Tarragona, Spain

Contact the author*

Keywords

sparkling wine, traditional method, ancestral method, foam properties

Tags

2ICGWS | ICGWS | ICGWS 2023 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Biotype diversity within the autochthonous ‘Bobal’ grapevine variety

Bobal is the second most widely grown Spanish red grape variety (54,165 has), mainly cultivated in the Valencian Community and especially, in Utiel-Requena region (about 67% of 34,000 has). In this study, agronomic and enological parameters were determined in 98 biotypes selected during 2018 and 2019 in more than 50 vineyards over 50 years-old in the Utiel-Requena region. Moreover, a multi-criteria approach considering temperature and rainfall (Fig. 1A), among other parameters, was made to establish three different zones within the region (Fig. 1B), where in the future the selected biotypes will evaluated. In fact, in 2020, 4 replicates and 12 vines per biotype were planted in an experimental vineyard to preserve this important intra-cultivar diversity.

Oenological compatibility of biocontrol yeasts applied to wine grapes 

Antagonistic yeasts applied to wine grapes must be compatible with the thereafter winemaking process, avoiding competition with the fermentative Saccharomyces cerevisiae or affecting wine flavour. Therefore, fifteen epiphytic yeasts (6 Metschnikowia sp., 6 Hanseniaspora uvarum, 3 Starmerella bacillaris) previously selected for its biocontrol ability against Alternaria on wine grapes were evaluate for possible competition with S. cerevisiae by the Niche Overlap Index (NOI) employing YNB agar media with 10 mM of 17 different carbonate sources present in wine grapes (proline, asparagine, alanine, glutamic acid, tirosine, arginine, lisine, methionine, glicine, malic acid, tartaric acid, fructose, melibiose, raffinose, rhamnose, sucrose, glucose).

Effect of pH and ethanol on Lactiplantibacillus plantarum in red must fermentation: potential use of wine lees

Wine is the result of the alcoholic fermentation (AF) of grape must. Besides AF, wine can also undergo the malolactic fermentation (MLF) driven out by lactic acid bacteria (LAB). Among LAB, Oenococcus oeni and Lactiplantibacillus plantarum are the dominant species in wine. Even if O. oeni is the most common LAB undergoing MLF in wine, due to its high tolerance to wine conditions, L. plantarum can be used to undergo MLF in must. The moderate tolerance of L. plantarum to low pH and ethanol, may compromise the fermentative process in harsh wines.

Control of bacterial growth in carbonic maceration winemaking through yeast inoculation

Controlling the development of the bacterial population during the winemaking process is essential for obtaining correct wines[1]. Carbonic Maceration (CM) wines are recognised as high-quality young wines. However, due to its particularities, CM winemaking implies a higher risk of bacterial growth: lower SO2 levels, enrichment of the must in nutrients, oxygen trapped between the clusters… Therefore, wines produced by CM have slightly higher volatile acidity values than those produced by the destemming/crushing method[2].

Can soil nitrate explain polyphenol and anthocyanin content in vineyard with similar available soil water regime? 

Nitrogen (N) is quite important nutrient in grapevine development and must quality, but under Mediterranean climatic conditions, available soil water (ASW) during grapevine development can also influence vigour and must quality. The aim was to determine the influence of soil nitrate (NO3-) availability on N foliar, yield, and must quality in vineyards with similar available water holding capacity (AWC). For this purpose, four cv. Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L.) vineyards were selected. All of them are placed in Uruñuela municipality (La Rioja, Spain), separated less than 2.5 km and in a slope <1 %, in soils with similar soil chemistry properties and with similar rooting depth (ranging between 105 cm and 110 cm).