terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 International Congress on Grapevine and Wine Sciences 9 2ICGWS-2023 9 The evolution of the aromatic composition of carbonic maceration wines

The evolution of the aromatic composition of carbonic maceration wines

Abstract

The vinification by Carbonic maceration (CM) involves the process whereby the whole bunches are subjected to anaerobic conditions during several days. In this anaerobic condition, the grape endogenous enzymes begin an intracellular fermentation. This situation favors that whole grapes split open and release their juice into the tank, increasing the liquid phase that is fermented by yeasts [1]. Then, two types of wines are obtained; one from the free-run liquid in the tank (FCM) and other from the liquid after pressing the whole grape bunches (PCM). PCM wines are recognized as high quality young wines because their fruity and floral aromas[2] that although they are very intense at the end of the winemaking they gradually disappear during conservation.

In this study, the aromatic composition evolution of FCM and PCM wines has been evaluated for 18 months and compared to wines elaborated by destemming/crushing.

The results showed a similar evolution in the aromatic composition of the three studied wines, with the total alcohols content almost stable and with an acetate concentration that decreased over time. In contrast, the esters concentration was increased after 18 months in every studied wine. The initial aromatic differences between the wines were maintained throughout the storage, except for the acetates content, that despite being higher in the PCM wines, decreased by a higher amount. Therefore, a quick transformation of the aromatic composition of the PCM that would imply their quick consumption was not observed.

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

References:

1)  Tesniere C, Flanzy C (2011) Carbonic maceration wines: characteristics and winemaking process. In: Jackson RS (ed) Adv Food Nutr Res. Academic Press Elsevier, Burlington, pp 1-15

2)  Spranger I et al (2004) Differentiation of red winemaking technologies by phenolic and volatile composition. Anal Chim Acta 513:151–161. doi:10.1016/j.aca.2004.01.023

DOI:

Publication date: October 13, 2023

Issue: ICGWS 2023

Type: Poster

Authors

P. Santamaría1, J. Portu1, L. González-Arenzana1, P. Garijo1, B. Larreina1 and A.R. Gutiérrez1

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

Contact the author*

Keywords

carbonic maceration, aromatic composition, evolution, storage

Tags

2ICGWS | ICGWS | ICGWS 2023 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Rootstock effect on Cabernet Sauvignon aromatic and chemical composition

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.

Phenotyping bud break and trafficking of dormant buds from grafted vine

In grapevine, phenology from bud break to berry maturation, depends on temperature and water availability. Increases in average temperatures accelerates initiation of bud break, exposing newly formed shoots to detrimental environmental stresses. It is therefore essential to identify genotypes that could delay phenology in order to adapt to the environment. The use of different rootstocks has been applied to change scion’s characteristics, to adapt and resist to abiotic and biotic stresses[1].

Moderate wine consumption – part of a balanced diet or a health risk?

Consumption of wine/alcoholic beverages remains a topic of great uncertainty and controversy worldwide. The term “no safe level” dominates the media communication and policy ever since population studies in 2018 [1,2] were published, which denied the existence of a J-curve and suggested that ANY consumption of an alcoholic beverage is harmful to health. The scientific evidence accumulated during the past decades about the health benefits of moderate wine consumption, were questioned and drinking guidelines considered to be too loose.

Can yeast cells sense other yeasts beyond competition interactions?

The utilization of non-Saccharomyces yeasts in the wine industry has increased significantly in recent years. Alternative species need commonly be employed in combination with Saccharomyces cerevisiae to avoid stuck fermentation, or microbial spoilage. The employment of more than one yeast starter can lead to interactions between different species with an impact on the outcome of wine fermentation. Previous studies[1] demonstrated that S. cerevisiae elicits transcriptional responses with both shared and species-specific features in co-culture with other yeast species.

Response of red grape varieties irrigated during the summer to water availability at the end of winter in four Spanish wine-growing regions: berry phenolic composition

Water availability is the most limiting factor for vineyard productivity under Mediterranean conditions. Due to the effects caused by the current climate change, wine-growing regions may face serious soil moisture conservation problems, due to the lower water retention capacity of the soil and higher soil irradiation. The aim of this work was to evaluate the effects of soil recharge irrigation in pre-sprouting and summer irrigation every week (30 % ETo) from the pea size state until the end of ripening (RP) compared to exclusively summer irrigation every week (R) in the same way that RP, on berry phenolic composition at harvest.