terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN THE VINEYARD ENVIRONMENTS: VINE LEAVES, GRAPE BERRIES, WINES, HONEYBEES AND ASIAN HORNETS

PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN THE VINEYARD ENVIRONMENTS: VINE LEAVES, GRAPE BERRIES, WINES, HONEYBEES AND ASIAN HORNETS

Abstract

Synthetic pesticides are widely used in viticulture to ensure steady harvest quality and quantity. Fungicides are primarily used to control grapevine diseases but insecticides and herbicides are likewise used. Pesticide residues in viticultural areas currently represent a strong societal concern, but may also affect different trophic chains in such areas. In this project we wish to analyse honeybees collected from hives placed in different vineyards, their natural predator (the invasive hornet Vespa velutina), as well as the honey, grape berries, and wines produced. In order to screen the different pesticides found in our study areas, it was first necessary to optimize the extraction procedure. Pesticide residues in plant matrices such as leaf or grape berry are regularly monitored at the ISVV using QuEChERS (Quick, Easy, Cheap, Effective, Rugged and Safe) extraction followed by LC-MS/MS analysis. A QuEChERS method was adapted based on previously published work in order to analyse honeybees and single hornets, for which the quantity of samples is limited. The method was improved using a zirconium-based sorbent for d-SPE, which is used to reduce the matrix effect in lipidic commodities. The performance of this developed method was evaluated for 42 pesticide residues. A significant matrix effect was however noted for some molecules, thus procedural calibration was used to quantify pesticide residues in real samples. Methodological developments and pesticide residue quantification results in various matrices will be presented.

DOI:

Publication date: February 9, 2024

Issue: OENO Macrowine 2023

Type: Poster

Authors

Céline Franc1, Léa Tison2, Louisiane Burkart2, Alice Rouzes2, Gilles de Revel1 and Denis Thiéry2

1. Univ. Bordeaux, INRAE, Bordeaux INP, Bordeaux Sciences Agro, UMR 1366, OENO, ISVV, Villenave d’Ornon, France
2. INRAE Bordeaux, UMR1065 SAVE, Villenave d’Ornon, France

Contact the author*

Keywords

analysis, pesticide contamination , QuEChERS, LC-MS/MS

Tags

IVES Conference Series | oeno macrowine 2023 | oeno-macrowine

Citation

Related articles…

VALORIZATION OF GRAPE WINE POMACE USING PULSED ELECTRIC FIELDS (PEF) AND SUPERCRITICAL CO₂ (SC CO₂) EXTRACTION

Wine grape pomace quantitatively and qualitatively represents the most important fraction of wine waste. Namely, this by-product makes ~ 20% of the total mass of vinified grapes, and it is characterized with high concentrations of polyphenolic antioxidants, as well as grape seed oil. Hence, valorization of wine pomace, as an alternative to traditionally employed disposal, has drown considerable interest in recent years. Earlier studies were mostly focused on the extraction of phenolics, while mechanisms enhancing the extraction of lipid fraction from grape pomace, as well as their impact on the grape seed oil quality are far less investigated.

MOUSY OFF-FLAVOURS IN WINES: UNVEILING THE MICROORGANISMS BEHIND IT

Taints and off-flavours are one of the major concerns in the wine industry and even if the issues provoked by them are harmless, they can still have a negative impact on the quality or on the visual perception of the consumer. Nowadays, the frequency of occurrence of mousy off-flavours in wines has increased.
The reasons behind this could be the significant decrease in sulphur dioxide addition during processing, the increase in pH or even the trend for spontaneous fermentation in wine. This off-flavour is associated with Brettanomyces bruxellensis or some lactic acid bacteria metabolisms.

INSIGHT THE IMPACT OF GRAPE PRESSING ON MUST COMPOSITION

The pre-fermentative steps play a relevant role for the characteristics of white wine [1]. In particular, the grape pressing can affect the chemical composition and sensory profile and its optimized management leads to the desired extraction of aromas and their precursors, and phenols resulting in a balanced wine [2-4]. These aspects are important especially for must addressed to the sparkling wine as appropriate extraction of phenols is expected being dependent to grape composition, as well.

EFFECT OF FUMARIC ACID ON SPONTANEOUS FERMENTATION IN GRAPE MUST

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).

BIOPROTECTION BY ADDING NON-SACCHAROMYCES YEASTS : ADVANCED RESEARCH ON THIS PROMISING ALTERNATIVE TO SO₂

Sulphur dioxide has been used for many years for its antimicrobial, antioxidant and antioxydasic properties in winemaking but nowadays, it is a source of controversy. Indeed, consumers are more attentive to the naturalness of their foods and beverages and the legislation is changing to reduce the total SO₂ levels allowed in wines. To limit and replace the doses of sulphur dioxide applied, winemakers can now use bioprotection consisting in live yeast addition as alternative,seems to be promising. This process, lightly used in from the food industry, allows to colonize the environment and limit the development or even eliminate undesirable microorganisms without altering the sensory properties of the product.