ASSESSING THE ROLE OF 27 KNOWN BITTER COMPOUNDS IN COMMERCIAL WHITE WINES COMBINING LC-MS QUANTIFICATION AND SENSORY ANALYSIS

Today, nearly one billion bottles of different sizes and capacities are aging in Champagne cellars while waiting to be put on the market. Among them, several tens of thousands of prestigious cuvees elaborated prior the 2000s are potentially concerned by prolonged aging on lees. However, when it comes to champagne tasting, dissolved CO₂ is a key compound responsible for the very much sought-after effer-vescence in glasses [1]. Yet, the slow decrease of dissolved CO₂ during prolonged aging of the most prestigious cuvees raises the issue of how long a champagne can age before it becomes unable to form CO₂ bubbles during tasting [2].

Mannoproteins (MPs) are proteoglycans from the outmost layer of yeast cell walls released into wine during alcoholic fermentation and ageing on lees processes. The use of commercial preparations of mannoproteins as additives to improve wine stability with regards to the crystallization of tartaric salts and to prevent protein haze in the case of white and rosé wines is authorized by the OIV.
Regarding red wines and polyphenols, mannoproteins are described as able to improve their colloidal stability and modulate the astringent effect of condensed tannins. The latter interact with salivary proteins forming insoluble aggregates that cause a loss of lubrication in the mouth and promote a drying and puckering sensation. However, neither the interaction mechanisms involved in mannoproteins capacity to impact astringency nor the structure-function relationships related to this property are fully understood.

Lately, rosé wine is rapidly increasing its popularity worldwide. Short-time macerations with the red skin of the grapes cause the partial extraction of anthocyanins, which are responsible for the pinki-sh-salmon hue of rosé wines. However, the low quantity of tannins (antioxidants) and richness in phenolic acids, which can be easily oxidized into yellowish pigments, tend to predispose rosé wines to an undesirable browning. Although the use of SO₂ for the prevention of oxidation is highly extended, this practice is expected to be reduced. Therefore, the search for alternative oenological adjuvants that prevent the oxidation and browning of rosé wines is highly desired.

Color is one of the key elements for the marketing of rosé wines due to their packaging in transparent bottles. Their broad color range is due to the presence of pigments belonging to phenolic compounds extracted from grapes or formed during the wine-making process. However, the mechanisms responsible for such diversity are poorly understood. The few investigations performed on rosé wines showed that their phenolic composition is highly variable, close to that of red wines for the darkest rosés but very different for light ones [1]. Moreover, large variations in the extent of color loss taking place during fermentation have been reported but the mechanisms involved and causes of such variability are unknown.

From the chemical angle, Champagne wines are complex hydro-alcoholic mixtures supersaturated with dissolved carbon dioxide (CO₂). During the pouring process and throughout the several minutes of tasting, the headspace of a champagne glass is progressively invaded by many chemical species, including gas-phase CO₂ in large majority. CO₂ bubbles nucleated in the glass and collapsing at the champagne surface act indeed as a continuous paternoster lift for aromas throughout champagne or sparkling wine tasting [1]. Nevertheless, inhaling a gas space with a concentration of gaseous CO₂ close to 30% and higher triggers a very unpleasant tingling sensation, the so-called “carbonic bite”, which might completely perturb the perception of the wine’s bouquet.