SUB-CRITICAL WATER: AN ORIGINAL PROCESS TO EXTRACT ANTIOXIDANTS COMPOUNDS OF WINE LEES

Wine tasting has been shown to provide emotions to tasters (Coste et al. 2018). How will expertise impact this emotional response? Burnham and Skilleås (2012) reported that the cultural, experiential, and aesthetic competencies characterize an expert in wine compared to a novice. Although there is no consensual definition of an aesthetic experience, Burnham and Skilleås (2012) reported that aesthetic appreciation is “disinterested, normative for others and communicable” in comparison to sensory pleasure.

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.).

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.

In 2020, 12% of all bottled German wines were aromatized, which may increase further due to rising popularity of dealcoholized wines. As sealing polymers of a bottling line absorb aroma compounds and may release them into regular wines in the next filling¹, this unintentional carry-over bears the risk to violate the legal ban of any aromatization of regular wine. However, following EU legislation, German food control authorities accept a technical unavoidable transfer of aroma compounds, if this is of no sensory significance.

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