terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 FUNGAL CHITOSAN IS AN EFFICIENT ALTERNATIVE TO SULPHITES IN SPECIFIC WINEMAKING SITUATIONS

FUNGAL CHITOSAN IS AN EFFICIENT ALTERNATIVE TO SULPHITES IN SPECIFIC WINEMAKING SITUATIONS

Abstract

The most common method to prevent or eliminate microbes in wine is sulfur dioxide (SO₂) addition. However, as risk of acute allergy exists, the European Union has classified SO₂ as one of the 14 priority food allergens (EU Regulation N°1169/2011, Annex II). The legal dose admitted in both conventional and organic farming will be downgraded probably in the near future, according to consumer’s expectations. In addition, sulfur dioxide addition does not always prevent microbial spoilage, because of the emergence of tolerant/resistant strains. Winemakers thus need alternate and efficient antiseptic methods to reduce total SO₂ content in wines. The resolutions of the 7th general assembly of the International Organization of Vine and Wine (OIV/OENO 338A/2009) and the European Union (EC 53/2011) authorized the addition of fungal chitosan to reduce spoilage microorganism populations especially Brettanomyces bruxellensis. Chitosan is a partially acetylated polysaccharide of glucosamine. It is positively charged at wine pH, which allows it to interact with the microorganisms and particles present in the wine. With the trend in oenology of limiting SO₂, more and more questions arise as to the impact of fungal chitosan on other microorganisms from grapes and wine-related environment. It was shown recently that most species were affected, at least transiently, by chitosan treatment (Miot-Sertier et al. 2022). However, a high variability prevails within most species and sensitive, intermediate and tolerant strains can be observed, as well as different efficiencies depending on the wine chemical parameters or the winemaking stage when the treatment is performed.

In order to have a clear opinion on the usefulness of a chitosan treatment, we have carried out tests in various situations in which sulphites were not enough to protect the wine (presence of tolerant strains in particular). Though chitosan does not solve all the microbial spoilage issues, this study reveals that chitosane can be an interesting alternative to sulphites in certain situations. Furthermore, when the antiseptic effect is clear it seems durable and hence, wines are protected for microbial spoilage over long periods.
The study also shows that structural differences among fungal chitosans impact their efficiency. The organoleptic consequences of the treatment are also evaluated on red and white wines.

DOI:

Publication date: February 9, 2024

Issue: OENO Macrowine 2023

Type: Poster

Authors

Cécile Miot-Sertier¹, Margot Paulin¹, Axel Marchal¹, Patricia Ballestra¹, Warren Albertin¹, Isabelle Masneuf Pomarède¹, Joana Coulon², Virginie Moine², Amélie Vallet-Courbin³, Julie Maupeu³, Thierry Doco⁴, Cédric Delattre5-6,Marguerite Dols-Lafargue¹

1. Univ. Bordeaux, INRAE, Bordeaux INP, Bordeaux Sciences Agro, OENO, UMR1366, ISVV, F-33140 Villenave d’Ornon, France
2. Biolaffort, 11 rue Aristide Bergès, 33270 Floirac, France
3. Microflora-ADERA, UMR 1366, ISVV, F-33140 Villenave d’Ornon, France
4. UMR 1083, UMR Sciences pour l’Oenologie, INRA, SupAgro, UM1, 2 place Viala, F-34060 Cedex Montpellier, France
5. Université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont Auvergne INP, CNRS, Institut Pascal, F-63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France
6. Institut Universitaire de France (IUF), 1 Rue Descartes, 75000 Paris, France

Contact the author*

Keywords

Antiseptic, Spoilage, Chitosan, Sulfites

Tags

IVES Conference Series | oeno macrowine 2023 | oeno-macrowine

Citation

Related articles…

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

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.

NOVEL BENZENETHIOLS WITH PHENOLS CAUSE ASHY, SMOKE FLAVOR PERCEPTION IN RED WINES

Smoke impacts on wines are becoming a worldwide problem; the size and severity of wildfires increasing due to influences from changing climates.¹ For over a century, wines have been known to have a unique issue of absorbing chemical compounds derived from wildfire smoke wherein the flavor of the subsequent wine becomes ashy, rubbery, campfire-like, and smoky.² The economic impacts of a smoke-impacted wine can last for years depending on the grape varietal, costing Oregon and Washington states in the United States over a billion dollars from the 2020 wildfires, as an example.³ While years of research have indicated elevated concentrations of smoke-related compounds, such as guaiacol and syringol, in wines after smoke events, unfortunately, replicating the sensory experience using smoke-associated phenols has not had much success.⁴

ACIDIC AND DEMALIC SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE STRAINS FOR MANAGING PROBLEMS OF ACIDITY DURING THE ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATION

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.

IMPACT OF MANNOPROTEIN N-GLYCOSYL PHOSPHORYLATION AND BRANCHING ON WINE POLYPHENOL INTERACTIONS WITH YEAST CELL WALLS

Yeast cell walls (CWs) may adsorb wine components with a significant impact on wine quality. When dealing with red wines, this adsorption is mainly related to physicochemical interactions between wine polyphenols and cell wall mannoproteins. However, mannoproteins are a heterogeneous family of complex peptidoglycans including long and highly branched N-linked oligosaccharides and short linear O-linked oligosaccharides, resulting in a huge structural diversity.

MONOSACCHARIDE COMPOSITION AND POLYSACCHARIDE FAMILIES OF LYOPHILISED EXTRACTS OBTAINED FROM POMACES OF DIFFERENT WHITE GRAPE VARIETIES

The recovery of bioactive compounds from grape and wine by-products is currently an important and necessary objective for sustainability. Grape pomace is one of the main by-products and is a rich source of some bioactive compounds such as polyphenols, polysaccharides, fatty acids, minerals and seed oil. Polysaccharides contained in the grape cell wall can be rhamnogalacturonans type II (RG-II), polysaccharides rich in arabinose and galactose (PRAG), mannoproteins (MP), homogalacturonans (HG) and non pectic polysaccharides (NPP).