terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 INVESTIGATION OF MALIC ACID METABOLIC PATHWAYS DURING ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATION USING GC-MS, LC-MS, AND NMR DERIVED 13C-LABELED DATA

INVESTIGATION OF MALIC ACID METABOLIC PATHWAYS DURING ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATION USING GC-MS, LC-MS, AND NMR DERIVED 13C-LABELED DATA

Abstract

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. In this work, we used 13C-labeled malic acid to understand the main routes of its consumption and its de novo production. Two strains selected for their opposed malic acid metabolism were compared by combining several analytical chemistry techniques. The isotopic enrichment of intracellular amino acids was measured by GC-MS, the relative quantification of intra- cellular and extracellular labeled compounds was achieved by 2D-NMR, and the absolute quantification of labeled and unlabeled extracellular organic acids was achieved by LC-MS/MS. Although, both strains consume most of the malic acid provided, the “acidic strain” produces de novo malic acid during the second part of the alcoholic fermentation. In addition, 13C-filiation analyses provided evidence that most of the TCA is fed by glycolytic pyruvate and/or by cytosolic acetyl-CoA. Our results also confirmed that malic acid may be a secondary source of TCA cycle during alcoholic fermentation especially in high malic acid consuming strains that has an efficient malo-ethanolic fermentation. Finally, 13C-labeled compounds belonging to amino acids, alcoholic fermentation and neoglucogenesis pathways were identified, highlighting the pleiotropic position of malic acid in both catabolic and anabolic routes.

DOI:

Publication date: February 9, 2024

Issue: OENO Macrowine 2023

Type: Poster

Authors

Vion Charlotte1,2, Bloem Audrey3, Valette Gilles4, Da Costa Gregory2, Richard Tristan2, Camarasa Carole3, Marullo Philippe 1,2

1. Biolaffort, Bordeaux, FRANCE
2. UMR 1366 Œnologie, Université de Bordeaux, INRAE, Bordeaux INP, BSA, ISVV
3. UMR SPO, Univ Montpellier, INRAE, Institut Agro, 34060 Montpellier, France
4. IBMM, Univ Montpellier, CNRS, ENSCM, 34000 Montpellier, France

Contact the author*

Keywords

13C-labeling, malic acid, central carbon metabolism

Tags

IVES Conference Series | oeno macrowine 2023 | oeno-macrowine

Citation

Related articles…

FUNCTIONALIZED MESOPOROUS SILICA IS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO BENTONITE FOR WINE PROTEIN STABILIZATION

The presence of grape-derived heat unstable proteins can lead to haze formation in white wines [1], an instability prevented by removing these proteins by adding bentonite, a hydrated aluminum silicate that interacts electrostatically with wine proteins leading to their flocculation. Despite effective, using bentonite has several drawbacks as the costs associated with its use, the potential negative effects on wine quality, and its environmental impact, so that alternative solutions are needed.

VOLATILE AND GLYCOSYLATED MARKERS OF SMOKE IMPACT: LEVELS AND PATTERNS OBSERVED IN 2020 WINES FROM THE UNITED STATES WEST COAST

Smoke impact in wines is caused by a wide range of volatile phenols found in wildfire smoke. These compounds are absorbed and accumulate in berries, where they may also become glycosylated. Both volatile and glycosylated forms eventually end up in wine where they can cause off-flavors, described as “smoky”, “bacon”, “campfire” and “ashtray”, often long-lasting and lingering on the palate. In cases of large wildfire events, economic losses for all wine industry actors can be devastating.

INFLUENCE OF GRAPE RIPENESS ON MACROMOLECULES EXTRACTABILITY FROM GRAPE SKIN TISSUES AND GRAPE SEEDS DURING WINEMAKING

A consequence of climate change is the modification of grape harvest quality and physico-chemical parameters of the obtained wine: increase in alcoholic degree, decrease in pH, and modification of the extractability of macromolecules, which leads to problems of microbiological, tartaric, colour and colloidal stability. In order to respond to these problems, the winemaking processes must be anticipated and adapted with a better knowledge of macromolecule extractability in grapes and their evolution, according to the grape variety, vintage and winemaking process. The purpose of this study was to understand 1) how the harvest date can influence the extractability of macromolecules, polysaccharides and phenolic compounds, which are responsible for wine stability 2) how to adapt the winemaking process to the harvest date in order to optimise wine quality.

VOLATILE AND GLYCOSYLATED MARKERS OF SMOKE IMPACT: EVOLUTION IN BOTTLED WINE

Smoke impact in wines is caused by a wide range of volatile phenols found in wildfire smoke. These compounds are absorbed and accumulate in berries, where they may also become glycosylated. Both volatile and glycosylated forms eventually end up in wine where they can cause off-flavors. The impact on wine aroma is mainly attributed to volatile phenols, while in-mouth hydrolysis of glycosylated forms may be responsible for long-lasting “ashy” aftertastes (1).

‘TROPICAL’ POLYFUNCTIONAL THIOLS AND THEIR ROLE IN AUSTRALIAN RED WINES

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.).