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

Sulfur dioxide (SO₂) is the most commonly used additive during winemaking to protect wine from oxidation and from microorganisms. Thus, since the 18th century, SO₂ was almost systematically present in wines. Recently, wines produced without any addition of SO₂ during all the winemaking process including bottling became more and more popular for consumers. A recent study dedicated to sensory characterization of Bordeaux red wines produced without added SO₂, revealed that such wines were perceived differently from similar wines produced with using SO₂ and were characterized by specific fruity aromas and coolness1,2.

Global warming is responsible for a lack of organic acid in grape berries, leading to wines with higher pH and lower titrable acidity. The chemical, microbiological and organoleptic equilibriums are impacted by this change of organic acid concentration. It is common practice to acidify the wine in order to prevent these imbalances that can lead to wine defects and early spoilage. Tartaric acid (TA) is most commonly used by winemaker for wine acidification purposes. Fumaric acid (FA), which is authorized by the OIV in its member states for the inhibition of malolactic fermentation, could also be used as a potential acidification candidate since it has a better acidifying power than tartaric acid.

In classic red wine-making process, grapes are usually destemmed between harvest and the filling of the vat. However, some winemakers choose to let all or a part of the stems in contact with the juice during vatting, this is called whole bunch vinification. For instance, this practice is traditionally used in some French wine regions, notably in Burgundy, Beaujolais and the Rhone Valley. The choice to keep this part of the grape is likely to affect the sensory properties of wine, as its gustatory perception1,2.

Smoke impacts on wines are becoming a worldwide problem; the size and severity of wildfires increasing due to influences from changing climates.¹ For over a century, wines have been known to have a unique issue of absorbing chemical compounds derived from wildfire smoke wherein the flavor of the subsequent wine becomes ashy, rubbery, campfire-like, and smoky.² The economic impacts of a smoke-impacted wine can last for years depending on the grape varietal, costing Oregon and Washington states in the United States over a billion dollars from the 2020 wildfires, as an example.³ While years of research have indicated elevated concentrations of smoke-related compounds, such as guaiacol and syringol, in wines after smoke events, unfortunately, replicating the sensory experience using smoke-associated phenols has not had much success.⁴

The definition of the term “quality” in sensory evaluation of food products does not seem to be consensual. Descriptive or liking methods are generally used to differentiate between wines (Lawless et al., 1997). Nevertheless, quality evaluation of a product such as wine can also relate to emotional aspects. As exposed by Costell (2002), product quality is defined as an integrated impression, like acceptability, pleasure, or emotional experiences during tasting. According to the ‘modality appropriateness’ hypothesis which predicts that wine tasters weigh the most suitable sensory inputs for a specific assess- ment (Freides, 1974; Welch & Warren, 1980), the nature of the quality definitions may modulate sensory influences.