SENSORY CHARACTERIZATION OF COGNAC EAUX-DE-VIE AGED IN BARRELS REPRESENTING DIFFERENT TOASTING PROCESS

During spirit beverages production, the distillate is divided in three parts: the head, the heart, and the tail. Acetaldehyde and ethanol are two key markers which allow the correct separation of distillate. Being toxic, the elimination of the head part, which contains high concentration of acetaldehyde, is crucial to guarantee the consumer’s health and security. Plus, the tail should be separated from the heart based on ethanol concentration.

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.

Malolactic fermentation (MLF)¹, the decarboxylation of L-malic acid into L-lactic acid, is performed by lactic acid bacteria (LAB). MLF has a deacidifying effect that may compromise freshness or microbiological stability in wines² and can be inhibited by fumaric acid [E297] (FA). In wine, can be added at a maximum allowable dose of 0.6 g/L³. Its inhibition with FA is being studied as an alternative strategy to minimize added doses of SO₂⁴. In addition, wine yeasts are capable of metabolizing and storing small amounts of FA and during alcoholic fermentation (AF).

In winemaking, the use of wood products alternative to barrels, has become a useful tool for the achievement of numerous oenological objectives, including the fast release of desirable volatile and polyphenolic compounds, colour stabilization, and important economic advantages if compared to the traditional barrel production. Among a huge array of variables, the wood format, the vinification protocol, especially the moment of the infusion of the woods and the exposed surface area of the alternative woods are of relevant significance, since they may influence the speed and intensity of the aroma transfer from the wood to the wine defining different sensory profiles.

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.