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

The overall quality of aged wines is in part due to the development of complex aromas over a long period (1.) The apparition of this aromatic complexity depends on multiple chemical reactions that include the liberation of odorous compounds from non-odorous precursors. One example of this phenomenon is found in dimethyl sulphide (DMS) which, with its characteristic odor truffle, is a known contributor to the bouquet of premium aged wine bouquet (1). DMS supposedly accumulates during the ten first years of ageing thanks to the hydrolysis of its precursor dimethylsulfoniopropionate (DMSp.) DMSp is a possible secondary by-product from the degradation of S-methylmethionine (SMM), an amino acid iden- tified in grapes (2), which can be metabolized by yeast during alcoholic fermentation.

Biodynamic agriculture, founded in 1924 by Rudolph Steiner, is a form of organic agriculture. Through a holistic approach, biodynamic agriculture seeks to preserve the diversity of agriculture and the existing interactions between the mineral world and the different components of the organic world. Biodynamic grape production involves the use of composts, herbal teas and mineral preparations such as 500, 501 and CBMT.
Several scientific studies have provided evidence on the effects of biodynamic farming on the soil, the plant and the wine. Numerous empirical opinions of wine growers support the existence of differences brought by such a management.

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.

After bottling, the wine continues to evolve during storage. The choice of the stopper is an important factor in this evolution. In addition to the oxygen permeability of the closure, the migration of stopper compounds into the wine can also have an impact on the wine organoleptic properties. Many studies have shown that transfers of volatile compounds from the stoppers into the wine can happen depending on the type of closure used (1). Moreover, when cork-made stoppers are used, the migration of phenolic compounds from the stopper into the wine can also occur (2, 3).

Over the last few years, several tools have been developed to reduce the quantity of sulfites used during winemaking, including bioprotection. Although its effectiveness in preventing the development of spoilage microorganisms has been proven, few data are available on the impact of sulfite substitution by bioprotection on the final product. The objective of this study was therefore to characterize Chardonnay wines with the addition of sulfite or bioprotection in the pre-fermentation stage. The effects of both treatments on resulting matrices was evaluated at several scales: analysis of classical oenological parameters, antioxidant capacity, phenolic compounds, non-volatile metabolome and sensory profile.