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

Following anecdotal evidence of unwanted ‘tropical’ character in red wines resulting from vineyard interventions and a subsequent yeast trial observing higher ‘red fruit’ character correlated with higher thiol concentrations, the role of polyfunctional thiols in commercial Australian red wines was investigated.
First, trials into the known tropical thiol modulation technique of foliar applications of sulfur and urea were conducted in parallel on Chardonnay and Shiraz.1 The Chardonnay wines showed expected results with elevated concentrations of 3-sulfanylhexanol (3-SH) and 3-sulfanylhexyl acetate (3-SHA), whereas the Shiraz wines lacked 3-SHA. Furthermore, the Shiraz wines were described as ‘drain’ (known as ‘reductive’ aroma character) during sensory evaluation although they did not contain thiols traditionally associated with ‘reductive’ thiols (H2S, methanethiol etc.).

Grape quality potential for wine production is strongly influenced by environmental parameters such as climate and agronomic factors such as rootstock. Several studies underline the effect of rootstock on vegetative growth of the scions [1] and on berry composition [2, 3] with an impact on wine quality. Rootstocks are promising agronomic tools for climate change adaptation and in most grape-growing regions the potential diversity of rootstocks is not fully used and only a few genotypes are planted. Little is known about the effect of rootstock genetic variability on the aromatic composition in wines; thus further investigations are needed.

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.

Glutathione is a natural tripeptide composed of l-glutamate, l-cysteine and glycine, found in various foods and beverages. In particular, glutathione can be found in its reduced (GSH) or oxidized form (GSSG) in must, wine or yeasts¹. Numerous studies have highlighted the importance of GSH in wine quality and aging potential². During winemaking, especially during aging on lees, GSH helps prevent the harmful effects of oxidation on the aroma of the wine³. Nevertheless, the amounts of GSH/GSSG present in wine lees are often unknown and the choice of operating conditions (quantity of lees and aging time) remains empirical.

Young white wines are typically released to the market a few months after harvest, to be consumed within a year, when their fresh fruity aromas are still dominant and appealing to modern consumers. Esters, particularly higher alcohol acetates (HAAs) and ethyl esters of fatty acids (EEFAs), play a central role in the fruity expression of young white wines [1]. However, these esters are known to undergo significant hydrolysis during the first months of aging [1, 2].