OENO IVAS 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 OENO IVAS 9 OENO IVAS 2019 9 Chemical and Biochemical reactions, including grape and wines microorganisms impact 9 When organic chemistry contributes to the understanding of metabolism mechanisms

When organic chemistry contributes to the understanding of metabolism mechanisms

Abstract

Many compounds of interest in wine are difficult to analyze since they are present in very small quantities or they are unstable. The need for reliable data led scientists to develop complex method in order to overcome the analytical difficulties and provide accurate quantitative data for grape or wine characterization.

For 10 years, we developed several chemical strategies to obtain analytical standards either as labelled analogues or as diastereomers to develop SIDA and DIDA analytical methods, respectively. These quantification methods afforded accurate and reliable results by suppressing analytical bias due to sample preparation. Several examples will be presented from deuterated analogues: varietal thiols [1], thiol precursors [2], Ochratoxin A [3], and diastereoisomers: Ochratoxin A [4] and hydroxycinnamic acids [5].

Another interesting application based on synthetic compounds lies in their possible exploitation as tracers. Indeed, the scale-up and optimization of chemical syntheses from μg to mg levels provided us with substantial amounts of molecules that could be used in metabolism studies. For example, we recently used labelled thiol precursors as tracers in Sauvignon Blanc musts for metabolism studies. Degradation of such tracers was monitored to highlight several key interconversion mechanisms and bring new elements in varietal thiol biogenesis knowledge [6]. In these applications, the choice of the labelling position (for Ochratoxin A for instance) or multilabelling possibilies (for thiol precursors) offer future opportunity to investigate detoxification process or to obtain insight in the metabolism of aroma precursors, respectively.

References

1. a) A. Roland, R. Schneider, A. Razungles and F. Cavelier, Varietal thiols in wine: Discovery, Synthesis and Applications, Chem. Rev. 2011, 111, 7355. b) R. Schneider, Y. Kotseridis, J.-L. Ray, C. Augier and R.Baumes, Quantitative determination of sulfur-containing wine odorants at sub parts per billion levels.
2. Development and application of a stable isotope dilution assay, J. Agri. Food Chem., 2003, 51, 3243. 2. H.Bonnaffoux, A.Roland, E.Rémond, S.Delpech, R.Schneider, F.Cavelier, First identification and quantification of S-3- (hexan-1-ol)-γ-glutamyl-cysteine in grape must as a potential thiol precursor, using UPLC-MS/MS analysis and stable iso-tope dilution assay, Food Chem., 2017, 237, 877.
3. A.Bouisseau, A.Roland, R.Schneider and F.Cavelier, First Synthesis of a Stable Isotope of Ochratoxin A Metabolite for a Reliable Detoxification Monitoring, Org. Lett., 2013, 15, 3888.
4. A.Roland, P.Bros, A.Bouisseau, F.Cavelier and R.Schneider, Analysis of Ochratoxin A in musts and wines by LCMS/MS: Comparison of Stable Isotope Dilution Assay and Diastereomeric Dilution Assay Methods, Anal. Chim. Acta, 2014, 818, 39.
5. F. Cavelier, A. Roland, A. Bouisseau, J. Martinez, R. Schneider. Method for the esterification of polar molecules, WO 2015 011230
6. H. Bonnaffoux, S. Delpech, E. Rémond, R. Schneider, A. Roland, F. Cavelier, Revisiting the evaluation strategy of varietal thiol biogenesis, Food Chem., 2018, 268, 126.

DOI:

Publication date: June 19, 2020

Issue: OENO IVAS 2019

Type: Article

Authors

Florine Cavelier Hugo Bonnaffoux, Anaïs Bouisseau, Stéphane Delpech, Aurélie Roland, Rémi Schneider

Université de Montpellier (France)

Contact the author

Keywords

organic chemistry, analytical chemistry, internal standards, aroma

Tags

IVES Conference Series | OENO IVAS 2019

Citation

Related articles…

Genotypic variability in root architectural traits and putative implications for water uptake in grafted grapevine

Root system architecture (RSA) is important for soil exploration and edaphic resources acquisition by the plant, and thus contributes largely to its productivity and adaptation to environmental stresses, particularly soil water deficit. In grafted grapevine, while the degree of drought tolerance induced by the rootstock has been well documented in the vineyard, information about the underlying physiological processes, particularly at the root level, is scarce, due to the inherent difficulties in observing large root systems in situ. The objectives of this study were to determine genetic differences in the root architectural traits and their relationships to water uptake in two Vitis rootstocks genotypes (RGM, 140Ru) differing in their adaptation to drought. Young rootstocks grafted upon the Riesling variety were transplanted into cylindrical tubes and in 2D rhizotrons under two conditions, well watered and moderate water stress. Root traits were analyzed by digital imaging and the amount of transpired water was measured gravimetrically twice a week. Root phenotyping after 30 days reveal substantial variation in RSA traits between genotypes despite similar total root mass; the drought-tolerant 140Ru showed higher root length density in the deep layer, while the drought-sensitive RGM was characterised by shallow-angled root system development with more basal roots and a larger proportion of fine roots in the upper half of the tube. Water deficit affected canopy size and shoot mass to a greater extent than root development and architectural-related traits for both 140Ru and RGM, suggesting vertical distribution of roots was controlled by genotype rather than plasticity to soil water regime. The deeper root system of 140Ru as compared to RGM correlated with greater daily water uptake and sustained stomata opening under water-limited conditions but had little effect on above-ground growth. Our results highlight that grapevine rootstocks have constitutively distinct RSA phenotypes and that, in the context of climate change, those that develop an extensive root network at depth may provide a desirable advantage to the plant in coping with reduced water resources.

‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ (Vitis vinifera L.) berry skin flavonol and anthocyanin composition is affected by trellis systems and applied water amounts

Trellis systems are selected in wine grape vineyards to mainly maximize vineyard yield and maintain berry quality. This study was conducted in 2020 and 2021 to evaluate six commonly utilized trellis systems including a vertical shoot positioning (VSP), two relaxed VSPs (VSP60 and VSP80), a single high wire (SH), a high quadrilateral (HQ), and a guyot (GY), combined with three levels of irrigation regimes based on different crop evapotranspiration (ETc) replacements, including a 25% ETc, 50% ETc, and 100% ETc. The results indicated SH yielded the most fruits and accumulated the most total soluble solids (TSS) at harvest in 2020, however, it showed the lowest TSS in the second season. In 2020, SH and HQ showed higher concentrations in most of the anthocyanin derivatives compared to the VSPs. Similar comparisons were noticed in 2021 as well. SH and HQ also accumulated more flavonols in both years compared to other trellis systems. Overall, this study provides information on the efficacy of trellis systems on grapevine yield and berry flavonoid accumulation in a currently warming climate.

Deconstructing the soil component of terroir: from controversy to consensus

Wine terroir describes the collectively recognized relation between a geographical area and the distinctive organoleptic characteristics of the wines produced in it. The overriding objective in terroir studies is therefore to provide scientific proof relating the properties of terroir components to wine quality and typicity. In scientific circles, the role of climate (macro-, meso- and micro-) on grape and wine characteristics is well documented and accepted as the most critical. Moreover, there has been increasing interest in recent years about new elements with possible importance in shaping wine terroir like berry/leaf/soil microbiology or even aromatic plants in proximity to the vineyard conferring flavors to the grapes. However, the actual effect of these factors is also dependent on complex interactions with plant material (variety/clone, rootstock, vine age) and with human factors.
The contribution of soil, although a fundamental component of terroir and extremely popular among wine enthusiasts, remains a much-debated issue among researchers. The role of geology is probably the one mostly associated by consumers with the notion of terroir with different parent rocks considered to give birth to different wine styles. However, the relationship between wine properties and the underlying parent material raises a lot of controversy especially regarding the actual existence of rock-derived flavors in the wine (e.g. minerality). As far as the actual soil properties are concerned, the effect of soil physical properties is generally regarded as the most significant (e.g sandy soils being associated with lighter wines while those on clay with colored and tannic ones) mostly through control of water availability which ultimately modifies berry ripening conditions either directly by triggering biosynthetic pathways, or indirectly by altering vigor and yield components. The role of soil chemistry seems to be weakly associated to wine sensory characteristic, although N, K, S and Ca, but also soil pH, are often considered important in the overall soil effect.
Recently, in the light of evidence provided by precision agriculture studies reporting a high variability of vineyard soils, the spatial scale should also be taken into consideration in the evaluation of the soil effects on wines. While it is accepted that soil effects become more significant than climate on a local level, it is not clear whether these micro-variations of vineyard soils are determining in the terroir effect. Moreover, as terroir is not a set of only natural factors, the magnitude of the contribution of human-related factors (irrigation, fertilization, soil management) to the soil effect still remains ambiguous. Lastly, a major shortcoming of the majority of works about soil effects on wine characteristics is the absence of connection with actual vine physiological processes since all soil effects on grape and wine chemistry and sensorial properties are ultimately mediated through vine responses.
This article attempts to breakdown the main soil attributes involved in the terroir effect to suggest an improved understanding about soil’s true contribution to wine sensory characteristics. It is proposed that soil parameters per se are not as significant determining factors in the terroir effect but rather their mutual interactions as well as with other natural and human factors included in the terroir concept. Consequently, similarly to bioclimatic indices, composite soil indices (i.e. soil depth, water holding capacity, fertility, temperature etc), incorporating multiple soil parameters, might provide a more accurate and quantifiable means to assess the relative weight of the soil component in the terroir effect.

Terroir analysis and its complexity

Terroir is not only a geographical site, but it is a more complex concept able to express the “collective knowledge of the interactions” between the environment and the vines mediated through human action and “providing distinctive characteristics” to the final product (OIV 2010). It is often treated and accepted as a “black box”, in which the relationships between wine and its origin have not been clearly explained. Nevertheless, it is well known that terroir expression is strongly dependent on the physical environment, and in particular on the interaction between soil-plant and atmosphere system, which influences the grapevine responses, grapes composition and wine quality. The Terroir studying and mapping are based on viticultural zoning procedures, obtained with different levels of know-how, at different spatial and temporal scales, empiricism and complexity in the description of involved bio-physical processes, and integrating or not the multidisciplinary nature of the terroir. The scientific understanding of the mechanisms ruling both the vineyard variability and the quality of grapes is one of the most important scientific focuses of terroir research. In fact, this know-how is crucial for supporting the analysis of climate change impacts on terroir resilience, identifying new promised lands for viticulture, and driving vineyard management toward a target oenological goal. In this contribution, an overview of the last findings in terroir studies and approaches will be shown with special attention to the terroir resilience analysis to climate change, facing the use and abuse of terroir concept and new technology able to support it and identifying the terroir zones.

The use of rootstock as a lever in the face of climate change and dieback of vineyard

As viticulture faces challenges such as climate change or vineyard dieback, the choice of the variety and rootstock becomes more and more crucial. To study rootstock levers in the Bordeaux region, a parcel of Cabernet Sauvignon (CS) was planted with four rootstocks in 2014. Twenty repetitions of each of the following four rootstocks were set up: 101-14 MGt, Nemadex AB, 420A MGt and Gravesac. The number of bunches, yields and pruning weights of the vine shoots were measured individually on 240 vines from 2017 to 2021. Since 2020, nitrogen status assessed by assimilable nitrogen level, hydric status assessed by δ13C and berry maturity were measured on 80 samples taken from 20 repetitions of the four rootstocks. A lower yield was measured for CS grafted onto Nemadex AB due to the lower number of bunches and the lower weight of berries. The differences between the other three rootstocks are small, but CS grafted onto 420A MGt was the most productive. The CS grafted onto Nemadex AB had the lowest pruning weight while 101-14 MGt had the highest. In 2020, δ13C showed a more moderate water stress with 101-14 MGt and 420A MGt than with Nemadex AB. Surprisingly, the Gravesac was under more stress than the 101-14 MGt. The nitrogen status in the berries was better for Nemadex AB but this was perhaps due to the significantly lower weight of the berries.Rootstock 101-14 MGt attained the highest accumulation of sugars in the berries while 420A MGt allows to preserve higher acidity. The parcel is still young which may explain some of the results. These measures must therefore be continued over the next several years to fully assess the effects of these rootstocks on the development of the vines and the quality of the production under new climatic conditions.