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…

MAPPING OF GAS-PHASE CO₂ IN THE HEADSPACE OF CHAMPAGNE GLASSES BY USING AN INFRARED LASER SENSOR UNDER STATIC TASTING CONDITIONS

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.

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.

EFFECT OF FERMENTATION TEMPERATURE GRADIENT AND SKIN CONTACT ON ESTER AND THIOL PRODUCTION AND TROPICAL FRUIT PERCEPTION IN CHARDONNAY WINES

Wines with tropical fruit aromas have become increasingly more available1,2. With increased availability of different wine styles, it has become important to understand the compounds that cause the fruity aromas in wine. Previous work using micro fermentations showed that fermentation temperature gradients and time on skins resulted in an increase in thiol and ester compounds post fermentation and these compounds are known to cause tropical fruit aroma in wines³. This work aimed to scale up these fermentations/operations to determine if the desired aromas could still be achieved and if there is a perceivable difference in tropical fruit aromas, liking, and emotional response in the wines at the consumer level.

FUNGAL CHITOSAN IS AN EFFICIENT ALTERNATIVE TO SULPHITES IN SPECIFIC WINEMAKING SITUATIONS

[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"...

EFFECT OF MANNOPROTEIN-RICH EXTRACTS FROM WINE LEES ON PHENOLICCOMPOSITION AND COLOUR OF RED WINE

In 2022, wine production was estimated at around 260 million hl. This high production rate implies to generate a large amount of by-products, which include grape pomace, grape stalks and wine lees. It is estimated that processing 100 tons of grapes leads to ~ 22 tons of by-products from which ~ 6 tons are lees [1]. Wine lees are a sludge-looking material mostly made of dead and living yeast cells, yeast debris and other particles that precipitate at the bottom of wine tanks after alcoholic fermentation. Unlike grape pomace or grape stalks, few strategies have been proposed for the recovery and valorisation of wine less [2].