MONITOR SOME KEY PARAMETERS THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OFCONTINUOUS CONTROL SYSTEMS OF THE MUST-WINE DURING MACERATION-FERMENTATION IN RED WINEMAKING TO MANAGE OPERATIONS IN “AUTOMATION”

Right after the pouring of wine in a glass, a myriad of volatile organic compounds, including ethanol, overwhelm the glass headspace, thus causing the so-called wine’s bouquet [1]. Otherwise, it is worth noting that during wine tasting, most people automatically swirl their glass to enhance the release of aromas in the glass headspace [1]. About a decade ago, Swiss researchers revealed the complex fluid mechanics underlying wine swirling [2]. However, despite mechanically repeated throughout wine tasting, the consequences of glass swirling on the chemical space found in the headspace of wine glasses are still barely known.

Sulfur dioxide (SO₂) is the most commonly used additive during winemaking to protect wine from oxidation and from microorganisms. Thus, since the 18th century, SO₂ was almost systematically present in wines. Recently, wines produced without any addition of SO₂ during all the winemaking process including bottling became more and more popular for consumers. A recent study dedicated to sensory characterization of Bordeaux red wines produced without added SO₂, revealed that such wines were perceived differently from similar wines produced with using SO₂ and were characterized by specific fruity aromas and coolness1,2.

Understanding the composition of wine and how it is influenced by climate or wine-making practices is a challenging issue. Two approaches are typically used to explore this issue. The first approach uses chemical
fingerprints, which require advanced tools such as high-resolution mass spectrometry and multidimensional chromatography. The second approach is the targeted method, which relies on the widely available 1-D GC/MS, but involves integrating the areas under a few peaks which ends up using only a small fraction of the chromatogram.

Most of the effects of ultrasound (US) result from the collapse of bubbles due to cavitation. The shockwave produced is associated with shear forces, along with high localised temperatures and pressures. However, the high-speed stream, radical species formation, and heat generated during sonication may also affect the stability of some enzymes and proteins, depending on their chemical structure. Recently, Ce-lotti et al. (2021) reported the effects of US on protein stability in wines. To investigate this further, the effect of temperature (40°C and 70°C; 60s), sonication (20 kHz and 100 % amplitude, for 20s and 60s, leading to the same temperatures as above, respectively), in combination with Aspergillopepsins I (AP-I) supplementation (100 μg/L), was studied on unstable protein concentration (TLPs and chitinases) using HPLC with an UV–Vis detector in a TLPs-supplemented model system and in an unstable white wine.

Malolactic fermentation (MLF)¹, the decarboxylation of L-malic acid into L-lactic acid, is performed by lactic acid bacteria (LAB). MLF has a deacidifying effect that may compromise freshness or microbiological stability in wines² and can be inhibited by fumaric acid [E297] (FA). In wine, can be added at a maximum allowable dose of 0.6 g/L³. Its inhibition with FA is being studied as an alternative strategy to minimize added doses of SO₂⁴. In addition, wine yeasts are capable of metabolizing and storing small amounts of FA and during alcoholic fermentation (AF).