DO MICROPLASTICS IN VINEYARD SOIL AFFECT THE BIOAVAILABILITY OF VINE NUTRITION?

During spirit beverages production, the distillate is divided in three parts: the head, the heart, and the tail. Acetaldehyde and ethanol are two key markers which allow the correct separation of distillate. Being toxic, the elimination of the head part, which contains high concentration of acetaldehyde, is crucial to guarantee the consumer’s health and security. Plus, the tail should be separated from the heart based on ethanol concentration.

Nowadays, the use of food preservatives is controversial, SO2 being no exception. Microbial communities have been particularly studied during the prefermentary and fermentation stages in a context of without added SO2. However, microbial risks associated with SO2 reduction or absence, particularly during the wine aging process, have so far been little studied. The microbiological control of wine aging is a key issue for winemakers wishing to produce wines without added SO2. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the impact of different wine aging strategies according to the addition or not of SO2 on the microbiological population levels and diversity.

Wine regions are getting warmer as average temperatures continue raising affecting grape growth, berry composition and wine production. Berry quality was evaluated in plants of Vitis vinifera cv Syrah grafted on two rootstocks, Paulsen (PL1103) and SO4, and grown under two salinity concentrations (LS:0.7dS/m and HS:2.5dSm-1) in combination with two irrigation regimes (HW:133% and CW:100%), being the seasonal water application 483mm (control, 100%). Spectrophotometer measurements from berry skin during veraison and harvest stages and from “young” wine samples, were indicative of the stressors effect and the mediation of the rootstocks. At veraison (i) total phenolics content were high under LSHW (0.7dSm-1 and high water conditions) for SO4 and PL1103.

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.

In recent years, vineyards in Australia, the US, Canada, Chile, South Africa and Europe have been exposed to smoke from wildfires. Wines made from smoke-affected grapes often exhibit unpleasant smoky, ashy characters, attributed to the presence of smoke-derived volatile compounds, including volatile phenols (which occur in free and glycosylated forms). Various strategies for remediation of smoke tainted wine have been evaluated. The most effective strategies involve the removal of smoke taint compounds via the addition of adsorbent materials such as activated carbon, which can either be added directly or used in combination with nanofiltration. However, these treatments often simultaneously remove wine constituents responsible for desirable aroma, flavour and colour attributes.