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

The overall quality of aged wines is in part due to the development of complex aromas over a long period (1.) The apparition of this aromatic complexity depends on multiple chemical reactions that include the liberation of odorous compounds from non-odorous precursors. One example of this phenomenon is found in dimethyl sulphide (DMS) which, with its characteristic odor truffle, is a known contributor to the bouquet of premium aged wine bouquet (1). DMS supposedly accumulates during the ten first years of ageing thanks to the hydrolysis of its precursor dimethylsulfoniopropionate (DMSp.) DMSp is a possible secondary by-product from the degradation of S-methylmethionine (SMM), an amino acid iden- tified in grapes (2), which can be metabolized by yeast during alcoholic fermentation.

Water deficit and salinity are increasingly affecting the viticulture and wine industry. These two stresses are intimately related; understanding the physiological and metabolic responses of grapevines to water deficit, salinity and combined stress is critical for developing strategies to mitigate the nega- tive impacts of these stresses on wine grape production. These strategies can include selecting more tolerant grapevine cultivars and graft combinations, improving irrigation management, and using soil amendments to reduce the effects of salinity. For this purpose, understanding the response of grape- vine metabolism to altered water balance and salinity is of pivotal importance.

Hanseniaspora vineae (Hv) is a fermenting non-Saccharomyces yeast that compared to Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Sc) present some peculiar features on its metabolism that make it attractive for its use in wine production. Among them, it has been reported a faster yeast lysis and release of polysaccharides, as well as increased ß-glucosidase activity. Hv also produces distinctive aroma compounds, including elevated levels of fermentative compounds such as ß-phenylethyl acetate and norisoprenoids like safranal. However, it is known for its high nutritional requirements, resulting in prolonged and sluggish fermentations, even when complemented with Sc strain and nutrients.

Under standard wine tasting conditions, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) responsible for the wine’s bouquet progressively invade the glass headspace above the wine surface. Most of wines being complex water/ethanol mixtures (with typically 10-15 % ethanol by volume), gaseous ethanol is therefore undoubtedly the most abundant VOC in the glass headspace [1]. Yet, gaseous ethanol is known to have a multimodal influence on wine’s perception [2]. Of particular importance to flavor perception is the effect of ethanol on the release of aroma compounds into the headspace of the beverage [1].

In a recent study several genes controlling the acidification properties of the wine yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae have been identified by a QTL approach [1]. Many of these genes showed allelic variations that affect the metabolism of malic acid and the pH homeostasis during the alcoholic fermentation. Such alleles have been used for driving genetic selection of new S. cerevisiae starters that may conversely acidify or deacidify the wine by producing or consuming large amount of malic acid [2]. This particular feature drastically modulates the final pH of wine with difference of 0.5 units between the two groups.