PAIRING WINE AND STOPPER: AN OLD ISSUE WITH NEW ACHIEVEMENTS

Malic acid has a strong impact on wine pH and the contribution of fermenting yeasts to modulate its concentration has been intensively investigated in the past. Recent advances in yeast genetics have shed light on the unexpected property of some strains to produce large amounts of malic acid (“acidic strains”) while most of the wine starters consume it during the alcoholic fermentation. Being a key metabolite of the central carbohydrate metabolism, malic acid participates to TCA and glyoxylate cycles as well as neoglucogenesis. Although present at important concentrations in grape juice, the metabolic fate of malic acid has been poorly investigated.

Enzymatic browning (BE) of must is caused by polyphenol oxidases (PPOs), tyrosinase and laccase. Both PPOs can oxidize diphenols such as hydroxycinnamic acids (HA) to quinones, which can later polymerize to form melanins [1], which are responsible of BE in white wines and of oxidasic haze in red wines. SO₂ is the main tool used to protect must from BE thanks to its capacity to inhibit PPOs [2]. However, the current trend in winemaking is to reduce and even eliminate this unfriendly additive. Among the different possible alternatives for protecting must against BE, the inoculation with a selected Metschnikowia pulcherrima MP1 is without any doubt one of the most promising ones.

Brettanomyces bruxellensis is an ubiquitous yeast associated with different fermentation media such as beer and kombucha, where its presence is beneficial to bring an aromatic typicity. However, it is a main spoilage yeast in wines, in which it produces volatile phenols responsible for organoleptic deviations causing significant economic losses (Chatonnet et al., 1992). Cellar and winery equipment’s are considered as the first source of contamination, during fermentation and wine ageing process (Connel et al., 2002). Indeed, it is possible to find B. bruxellensis in the air, on walls and floors of the cellars, on small materials, vats and barrels.

Wine aroma analysis can be done by sensorial or instrumental analysis, the latter involving several me-thodologies based on olfactometric detection, electronic noses or gas chromatography. Gas Chromatography has been widely used for the study of the volatile composition of wines and depending on the detection system coupled to the chromatographic system, quantification and identification of individual compounds can be achieved.

Most of the effects of ultrasound (US) result from the collapse of bubbles due to cavitation. The shockwave produced is associated with shear forces, along with high localised temperatures and pressures. However, the high-speed stream, radical species formation, and heat generated during sonication may also affect the stability of some enzymes and proteins, depending on their chemical structure. Recently, Ce-lotti et al. (2021) reported the effects of US on protein stability in wines. To investigate this further, the effect of temperature (40°C and 70°C; 60s), sonication (20 kHz and 100 % amplitude, for 20s and 60s, leading to the same temperatures as above, respectively), in combination with Aspergillopepsins I (AP-I) supplementation (100 μg/L), was studied on unstable protein concentration (TLPs and chitinases) using HPLC with an UV–Vis detector in a TLPs-supplemented model system and in an unstable white wine.