terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 MOVING FROM SULFITES TO BIOPROTECTION: WHICH IMPACT ON CHARDONNAY WINE?

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

Abstract

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. This integrative approach was used for the first time in the context of bioprotection on white wine. The analysis of classical oenological parameters did not reveal any differences between the two treatments. However, the use of sulfites in the pre-fermentation stage seemed to induce a higher antioxidant capacity than bioprotection in wine. This result was confirmed by the decrease in the concentration of some phenolic compounds in the bioprotected wines. UHPLC-q-ToF-MS analysis of finished wines revealed specific footprints reflecting the impact of each treatment. As a result, 618 biomarkers were associated to sulfite treatment, mainly represented by CHON compounds, which could correspond to peptides. Moreover, bioprotection treatment was characterized by 364 biomarkers, including predominantly lipids. These highlighted biomarkers could be associated with various metabolic pathways such as amino acid biosynthesis and cofactors biosynthesis. These important differences in metabolite composition observed between the wines could be explained by the presence or the absence of sulfites, known for their effects on yeast metabolism and wine compounds. In contrast to metabolomic analysis, a very small difference was perceived between the two treatment from a sensory point of view. Thus, this study revealed substantial changes in wines regarding their composition, without impacting their sensory profile. This integrated approach has provided new knowledge on the impact of sulfite substitution by bioprotection on Chardonnay wines.

DOI:

Publication date: February 9, 2024

Issue: OENO Macrowine 2023

Type: Article

Authors

Manon Lebleux¹, Hervé Alexandre¹, Rémy Romanet¹, Jordi Ballester², Vanessa David-Vaizant¹, Marielle Adrian³, Raphaëlle Tour-dot-Maréchal¹, Chloé Rouiller-Gall¹

1. Laboratoire VAlMiS-IUVV, AgroSup Dijon, UMR PAM A 02.102, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, 21000 Dijon, France
2. Centre des Sciences du Goût et de l’Alimentation, AgroSup Dijon, CNRS, INRA, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, 21000 Dijon, France
3. Agroécologie, Institut Agro Dijon, CNRS, INRAE, Univ. Bourgogne, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, Dijon, France

Contact the author*

Keywords

metabolomic, sensory, integrative approach, alternative

Tags

IVES Conference Series | oeno macrowine 2023 | oeno-macrowine

Citation

Related articles…

NEAR INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY FOR THE ESTIMATION OF TEMPRANILLO BLANCO VOLATILE COMPOSITION ALONG GRAPE MATURATION

Grape volatile compounds are mainly responsible for wine aroma, so it is important to know the va-rietal aromatic composition throughout ripening process. Currently, there are no tools that allow mea-suring the aromatic composition of grapes, in intact berries and periodically, throughout ripening, in the vineyard or in the winery. For this reason, this work evaluated the use of near infrared spectroscopy (NIR) to estimate the aromatic composition and total soluble solids (TSS) of Tempranillo Blanco berries during ripening. For this purpose, NIR spectra (1100-2100 nm) were acquired from 240 samples of in-tact berries, collected at different dates, from veraison to overripening.

BIOSORPTION OF UNDESIRABLE COMPONENTS FROM WINE BY YEAST-DERIVED PRODUCTS

4-Ethylphenol (EP) in wine is associated with organoleptic defects such as barn and horse sweat odors. The origin of EP is the bioconversion reaction of p-coumaric acid (CA), naturally present in grapes and grape musts by contaminating yeasts of the genus Brettanomyces bruxellensis.
Yeast cell walls (YCW) have shown adsorption capacities for different compounds. They could be applied to wines in order to adsorb either CA and/or EP and thus reduce the organoleptic defects caused by the contaminating yeasts.

ANTHOCYANINS EXTRACTION FROM GRAPE POMACE USING EUTECTIC SOLVENTS

Grape pomace is one of the main by-products generated after pressing in winemaking.Emerging methods, such as ultrasound-assisted extraction with eutectic mixtures, have great potential due to their low toxicity, and high biodegradability. Choline chloride (ChCl) was used as a hydrogen bond acceptor and its corresponding hydrogen bond donor (malic acid, citric acid, and glycerol: urea). Components were heated at 80 °C and stirred until a clear liquid was obtained. Distilled water was added (30 % v/v). A solid-liquid ratio of 1 g pomace per 10 ml of eutectic solvent was used.

FUNCTIONALIZED MESOPOROUS SILICA IS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO BENTONITE FOR WINE PROTEIN STABILIZATION

The presence of grape-derived heat unstable proteins can lead to haze formation in white wines [1], an instability prevented by removing these proteins by adding bentonite, a hydrated aluminum silicate that interacts electrostatically with wine proteins leading to their flocculation. Despite effective, using bentonite has several drawbacks as the costs associated with its use, the potential negative effects on wine quality, and its environmental impact, so that alternative solutions are needed.

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.