RED WINE AGING WITHOUT SO₂: WHAT IMPACT ON MICROBIAL COMMUNITY?

Aging red wines in oak barrels is an expensive and laborious process that can only be applied to wines with a certain added value. For this reason, the use of oak alternatives coupled with micro-oxygenation has progressively increased over recent years, because it can reproduce the processes taking place in the barrels more economically and quickly [1]. Several studies have explored how oak alternatives [2-5] can contribute to wine composition and quality but little is known about the influence of their thickness.

Copper in white wine can be associated with Cu(II) organic acids (Cu fraction I), Cu(I) thiol species (Cu fraction II), and Cu sulfides (Cu fraction III). The first two fractions are associated with the repression of reductive aromas in white wine, but these fractions gradually decrease in concentration during the normal bottle aging of wine. Although exposure of white wine to fluorescent light is known to induce the accumulation of volatile sulfur compounds, causing light-struck aroma, the influence on the loss of protective Cu fractions is uncertain. Riboflavin is known to be a critical initiator of photochemical reac-tions in wine, but the rate of its decay under short-term light exposure in different coloured bottles and for wine of different oxygen concentrations is not well understood.

Lately, rosé wine is rapidly increasing its popularity worldwide. Short-time macerations with the red skin of the grapes cause the partial extraction of anthocyanins, which are responsible for the pinki-sh-salmon hue of rosé wines. However, the low quantity of tannins (antioxidants) and richness in phenolic acids, which can be easily oxidized into yellowish pigments, tend to predispose rosé wines to an undesirable browning. Although the use of SO₂ for the prevention of oxidation is highly extended, this practice is expected to be reduced. Therefore, the search for alternative oenological adjuvants that prevent the oxidation and browning of rosé wines is highly desired.

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).

Grape quality potential for wine production is strongly influenced by environmental parameters such as climate and agronomic factors such as rootstock. Several studies underline the effect of rootstock on vegetative growth of the scions [1] and on berry composition [2, 3] with an impact on wine quality. Rootstocks are promising agronomic tools for climate change adaptation and in most grape-growing regions the potential diversity of rootstocks is not fully used and only a few genotypes are planted. Little is known about the effect of rootstock genetic variability on the aromatic composition in wines; thus further investigations are needed.