terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 BIOPROTECTION BY ADDING NON-SACCHAROMYCES YEASTS : ADVANCED RESEARCH ON THIS PROMISING ALTERNATIVE TO SO₂

BIOPROTECTION BY ADDING NON-SACCHAROMYCES YEASTS : ADVANCED RESEARCH ON THIS PROMISING ALTERNATIVE TO SO₂

Abstract

Sulphur dioxide has been used for many years for its antimicrobial, antioxidant and antioxydasic properties in winemaking but nowadays, it is a source of controversy. Indeed, consumers are more attentive to the naturalness of their foods and beverages and the legislation is changing to reduce the total SO₂ levels allowed in wines. To limit and replace the doses of sulphur dioxide applied, winemakers can now use bioprotection consisting in live yeast addition as alternative,seems to be promising. This process, lightly used in from the food industry, allows to colonize the environment and limit the development or even eliminate undesirable microorganisms without altering the sensory properties of the product. Recent research took the advantage of the availability of commercial non-Saccharomyces yeast to evaluate their bioprotective potential in oenology. From 2017 to 2021, different experiments were conducted using a mixture of two species (Torulaspora delbrueckii and Metschnikowia pulcherrima) as bioprotection applied at 50 mg/L directly on grapes or musts on different varieties and ripening stages. Our data showed that the bioprotection was successfully implanted in the medium, whith a lower colonization for over-ripened harvests. By using 18S metabarcoding analysis in grape must, we showed that fungal communities such as Hanseniaspora, Aspergillus or Botrytis were significantly less abundant when bio- protection was applied instead of SO₂. Furthermore, bioprotection added in the must rapidly consumed dissolved O₂ and had a negative impact on the strict aerobic acetic acid bacteria by limiting the development of these spoilage microorganisms. Experiments carried out in white must showed that bioprotection also limits the oxidation phenomena: the concentrations of glutathione were significantly higher in bioprotected white musts and final wines. Finally, bioprotection used in red winemaking presents a chemical signature, characterized by fatty acid ethyl esters, increasing the perception of fruitiness in young red wines, but to a lesser extend compared to the same yeast strains in mixed fermentation with S. cerevisiae. After bottling, the bioprotected wines were not sensorially different from wines without SO₂ addition but were different from classical sulphited wines. This research confirm the antimicrobial and a partial protection from oxidation by bioprotection in winemaking and its capacity to preserve sensory properties of wines.

DOI:

Publication date: February 9, 2024

Issue: OENO Macrowine 2023

Type: Article

Authors

Sara Windholtz1,2,Claudia Nioi1,2, Edouard Pelonnier-Magimel1,2, Joana Coulon³, Emmanuel Vinsonneau⁴, Stéphane Becquet⁵, Georgia Lytra1,2, Cécile Thibon1,2, Isabelle Masneuf-Pomarède1,2

1. Bordeaux, Bordeaux INP, INRAE, OENO, UMR 1366, ISVV, F-33140 Villenave d’Ornon, France
2. Bordeaux Sciences Agro, Bordeaux INP, INRAE, OENO, UMR 1366, ISVV, F-33170 Gradignan, France
3. Biolaffort, 11 Rue Aristide Bergès, 33270, Floirac, France
4. Institut Français de la Vigne et du Vin, Blanquefort, France
5. Syndicat des Vignerons Bio Nouvelle-Aquitaine, Montagne, France 

Contact the author*

Keywords

Bioprotection, Non-Saccharomyces, SO₂ alternative

Tags

IVES Conference Series | oeno macrowine 2023 | oeno-macrowine

Citation

Related articles…

FOLIAR APPLICATION OF METHYL JASMONATE AND METHYL JASMONATE PLUSUREA: INFLUENCE ON PHENOLIC, AROMATIC AND NITROGEN COMPOSITION OFTEMPRANILLO WINES

Phenolic, volatile and nitrogen compounds are key to wine quality. On one hand, phenolic compounds are related to wine color, mouthfeel properties, ageing potential. and are associated with beneficial health properties. On the other hand, wine aroma is influenced by hundreds of volatile compounds. Fermentative aromas represent, quantitatively, the wine aroma, and among these volatile compounds, esters, higher alcohols and acids are mainly responsible for the fermentation bouquet.

CONVOLUTIONAL NEURAL NETWORK TO PREDICT GENETIC GROUP AND SULFUR TOLERANCE OF BRETTANOMYCES BRUXELLENSIS

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.20.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

PROGRESS OF STUDIES OF LEES ORIGINATING FROM THE FIRST ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATION OF CHAMPAGNE WINES

Champagne wines are produced via a two-step process: the first is an initial alcoholic fermentation of grape must that produces a still base wine, followed by a second fermentation in bottle – the prise de mousse – that produces the effervescence. This appellation produces non-vintage sparkling wines composed of still base wines assembled from different vintages, varieties, and regions. These base wines, or “reserve wines,” are typically conserved on their fine lies and used to compensate for quality variance between vintages (1). Continuously blending small amounts of these reserve wines into newer ones also facilitates preserving the producer’s “house style.”

EXTRACTIBLE COMPOUNDS FROM MICROAGGLOMERATED CORK STOPPERS

After bottling, the wine continues to evolve during storage. The choice of the stopper is an important factor in this evolution. In addition to the oxygen permeability of the closure, the migration of stopper compounds into the wine can also have an impact on the wine organoleptic properties. Many studies have shown that transfers of volatile compounds from the stoppers into the wine can happen depending on the type of closure used (1). Moreover, when cork-made stoppers are used, the migration of phenolic compounds from the stopper into the wine can also occur (2, 3).

MOVING FROM SULFITES TO BIOPROTECTION: WHICH IMPACT ON CHARDONNAY WINE?

Over the last few years, several tools have been developed to reduce the quantity of sulfites used during winemaking, including bioprotection. Although its effectiveness in preventing the development of spoilage microorganisms has been proven, few data are available on the impact of sulfite substitution by bioprotection on the final product. The objective of this study was therefore to characterize Chardonnay wines with the addition of sulfite or bioprotection in the pre-fermentation stage. The effects of both treatments on resulting matrices was evaluated at several scales: analysis of classical oenological parameters, antioxidant capacity, phenolic compounds, non-volatile metabolome and sensory profile.