ACCUMULATION OF GRAPE METABOLITES IS DIFFERENTLY IMPACTED BY WATER DEFICIT AT THE BERRY AND PLANT LEVELS IN NEW FUNGUS DISEASE-TOLERANT GENOTYPES

In 2022, wine production was estimated at around 260 million hl. This high production rate implies to generate a large amount of by-products, which include grape pomace, grape stalks and wine lees. It is estimated that processing 100 tons of grapes leads to ~ 22 tons of by-products from which ~ 6 tons are lees [1]. Wine lees are a sludge-looking material mostly made of dead and living yeast cells, yeast debris and other particles that precipitate at the bottom of wine tanks after alcoholic fermentation. Unlike grape pomace or grape stalks, few strategies have been proposed for the recovery and valorisation of wine less [2].

Water deficit and salinity are increasingly affecting the viticulture and wine industry. These two stresses are intimately related; understanding the physiological and metabolic responses of grapevines to water deficit, salinity and combined stress is critical for developing strategies to mitigate the nega- tive impacts of these stresses on wine grape production. These strategies can include selecting more tolerant grapevine cultivars and graft combinations, improving irrigation management, and using soil amendments to reduce the effects of salinity. For this purpose, understanding the response of grape- vine metabolism to altered water balance and salinity is of pivotal importance.

Today, nearly one billion bottles of different sizes and capacities are aging in Champagne cellars while waiting to be put on the market. Among them, several tens of thousands of prestigious cuvees elaborated prior the 2000s are potentially concerned by prolonged aging on lees. However, when it comes to champagne tasting, dissolved CO₂ is a key compound responsible for the very much sought-after effer-vescence in glasses [1]. Yet, the slow decrease of dissolved CO₂ during prolonged aging of the most prestigious cuvees raises the issue of how long a champagne can age before it becomes unable to form CO₂ bubbles during tasting [2].

In the last decades the use of bioestimulants in viticulture have been promoted as alternative to conven- tional pesticides. Moreover, as bioestimulants promote the biosynthesis of secondary metabolites in grape berries, several studies had investigated their influence on the accumulation of phenolic com- pounds (Monteiro et al., 2022). However, few studies, so far, are focused on the accumulation of the vo- latile compounds and their impact on the produced wines (Giménez-Bañón et al., 2022; Gomez- Plaza et al., 2012; Ruiz Garcia et al., 2014).
This study was conducted in a single vineyard of white autochthonous grapevine variety Savvatia- no (Vitis vinifera L.) in Muses Valley (Askri, Viotia, Greece). Chitosan (CHT), Abscisic Acid (ABA) and Benzothiadiazole (BTH) were applied.

In a recent study several genes controlling the acidification properties of the wine yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae have been identified by a QTL approach [1]. Many of these genes showed allelic variations that affect the metabolism of malic acid and the pH homeostasis during the alcoholic fermentation. Such alleles have been used for driving genetic selection of new S. cerevisiae starters that may conversely acidify or deacidify the wine by producing or consuming large amount of malic acid [2]. This particular feature drastically modulates the final pH of wine with difference of 0.5 units between the two groups.