terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 EMERGENCE OF INORGANIC PHOSPHONATE RESIDUES IN GRAPEVINE PLANT PARTS, BERRIES AND WINES FROM SOURCES OTHER THAN FOLIAR SPRAYING

EMERGENCE OF INORGANIC PHOSPHONATE RESIDUES IN GRAPEVINE PLANT PARTS, BERRIES AND WINES FROM SOURCES OTHER THAN FOLIAR SPRAYING

Abstract

Inorganic phosphonates are known to effectively support the control of grapevine downy mildew in vi- ticulture. Their application helps the plant to induce an earlier and more effective pathogen defense. However, inorganic phosphonates have been banned in organic viticulture due to their classification as plant protection products since October 2013. Despite the ban, phosphonate has been recently detected in organic wines. Winemakers often assured that they had not applied the fungicide, however, without providing solid proof. This development has fueled the need to better understand potential phosphonate sources and, in particular, phosphonate uptake and distribution in vines. For this purpose, we set up an isolated test field with container vines, allowing to investigate different routes of uptake and the subse- quent mobility of phosphonate over two consecutive years after defined applications. Samples of leaves, stems and berries were analysed by IC-ICP-MS, being validated for quantification of low phosphonate levels therein (LOQs of 0.08-0.15 mg/kg fresh weight). Thereby, grapevines were shown to take up well detectable amounts of phosphonate through the roots, although the total amount found in berries was significantly lower when applying a 0.54 % (w/v) phosphonate solution to the roots (6 mg/kg) than after foliar spray application (38 mg/kg). Furthermore, the determination of the ratios of phosphonate levels in leaves and those in stems allowed identifying whether the vines were sprayed with phosphonate or took up phosphonate through the roots, e.g., from contaminated groundwater. We also present data from open-field vineyards to validate the results obtained with container vines. Besides soil-borne phospho- nate, we also found phosphonate residues in enological additives and processing aids, also contributing to potential phosphonate contaminations in the final wine product. In brief, our contribution will provi- de new insights into the origin of phosphonate in vines and derived wines originating from vineyards that had not been sprayed with phosphonate in the respective growing season.

DOI:

Publication date: February 9, 2024

Issue: OENO Macrowine 2023

Type: Article

Authors

Sören Otto1, Randolf Kauer2, Yvette Wohlfahrt¹, Beate Berkelmann-Löhnertz3, Bianca May4, Ralf Schweiggert1

1. Geisenheim University, Von-Lade-Strasse 1, D-65366 Geisenheim, Germany
2. Department of Beverage Research, Chair of Analysis & Technology of Plant-based Foods
3. Department of Viticulture, Chair of Organic Viticulture
4. Department of Crop Protection, Chair of Crop Protection in Viticulture and Horticulture
5. Department of Enology, Chair of Wine and Beverage Chemistry

Contact the author*

Keywords

phosphonic acid, contaminants, IC-ICP-MS, organic viticulture

Tags

IVES Conference Series | oeno macrowine 2023 | oeno-macrowine

Citation

Related articles…

IMPACT OF NEW BIO STIMULANTS ON GRAPE SECONDARY METABOLITES UNDER CLIMATE CHANGE CONDITIONS

In a context of climate change and excessive use of agrochemical products, sustainable approaches for environmental and human health such as the use of bio stimulants in viticulture represent a potential option, against abiotic and biotic threats. Bio stimulants are organic compounds, microbes, or a combination of both, that stimulate plant’s vital processes, allowing high yields and good quality products. In vines, may trigger an innate immune response leading to the synthesis of secondary metabolites, key compounds for the organoleptic properties of grapes and wines.

CHARACTERIZATION AND IDENTIFICATION OF YEAST BIOACTIVE PEPTIDES RELEASED DURING FERMENTATION AND AUTOLYSIS IN MODEL WINE

Aging wine on lees is a consolidated practice during which some yeast components (e.g., polysaccharides,
proteins, peptides) are released and solubilized in wine thus, affecting its stability and quality.
Apart from the widely studied mannoproteins, the role of other yeast components in modulating wine
characteristics is still scarce. Wine peptides have been studied for their contribution to taste, antioxidant,
and antihypertensive potentials. However, the peptides detected in wine can be influenced by the
interaction between yeasts and grape components.

GRAPE SPIRITS FOR PORT WINE PRODUCTION: SCREENING THEIR AROMA PROFILE

Port is a fortified wine, produced from grapes grown in the demarcated Douro region. The fortification process consists in the addition of a grape spirit (77% v/v) to the fermenting juice for fermentation interruption, resulting in remaining residual sugars in the wine and increased alcohol content (19-22%). The approval of grape spirits follows the Appellation (D.O. Port wine) rules1 and it is currently carried out based on analytical control and on sensory evaluation done by the public Institute that upholds the control of the quality of Douro Appellation wines. However, the producers of Port wines would like to have more information about quality markers of grape spirits.

WINE SWIRLING: A FIRST STEP TOWARDS THE UNLOCKING OF THE WINE’STASTER GESTURE

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.

VOLATILE AND GLYCOSYLATED MARKERS OF SMOKE IMPACT: EVOLUTION IN BOTTLED WINE

Smoke impact in wines is caused by a wide range of volatile phenols found in wildfire smoke. These compounds are absorbed and accumulate in berries, where they may also become glycosylated. Both volatile and glycosylated forms eventually end up in wine where they can cause off-flavors. The impact on wine aroma is mainly attributed to volatile phenols, while in-mouth hydrolysis of glycosylated forms may be responsible for long-lasting “ashy” aftertastes (1).