BIOSORPTION OF UNDESIRABLE COMPONENTS FROM WINE BY YEAST-DERIVED PRODUCTS

In 2022, wine production was estimated at around 260 million hl. This high production rate implies to generate a large amount of by-products, which include grape pomace, grape stalks and wine lees. It is estimated that processing 100 tons of grapes leads to ~ 22 tons of by-products from which ~ 6 tons are lees [1]. Wine lees are a sludge-looking material mostly made of dead and living yeast cells, yeast debris and other particles that precipitate at the bottom of wine tanks after alcoholic fermentation. Unlike grape pomace or grape stalks, few strategies have been proposed for the recovery and valorisation of wine less [2].

The color as well as the “clarity” of red wines are ones of the qualities required by the consumers. Red wines must have colloidal stability from its bottling to its consumption. The supplementation of red wines with additives, and especially Acacia senegal gum, contributes to its organoleptic properties such as the colloidal stabilization of the coloring matter. In a global perspective of limitation of additives in the field of enology, one of the objectives is notably (i) to reduce the use of additives in wines, by their number and/or their quantity, and (ii) to favor the use of natural additives while preserving the organoleptic and sensory qualities of wines.

Chitin is the main structural component of a large number of organisms (i.e., mollusks, insects, crustaceans, fungi, algae), and marine invertebrates including crabs and shrimps. The main derivative of chitin is chitosan (CH), produced by N-deacetylation of chitin in alkaline solutions. Over the past decade, the OIV/OENO 338A/ 2009 resolution approved the addition of allergen-free fungoid CH to must and wine as an adjuvant for microbiological control, prevention of haziness, metals chelation and ochratoxins removal (European Commission. 2011). Despite several studies on application of CH in winemaking, there are still very limited and controversial data on its interaction with acidic components in wine (Colan-gelo et al., 2018; Castro Marin et al., 2021).

Sulphur dioxide has been used for many years for its antimicrobial, antioxidant and antioxydasic properties in winemaking but nowadays, it is a source of controversy. Indeed, consumers are more attentive to the naturalness of their foods and beverages and the legislation is changing to reduce the total SO₂ levels allowed in wines. To limit and replace the doses of sulphur dioxide applied, winemakers can now use bioprotection consisting in live yeast addition as alternative,seems to be promising. This process, lightly used in from the food industry, allows to colonize the environment and limit the development or even eliminate undesirable microorganisms without altering the sensory properties of the product.

With the development of naturality expectations, wines produced without any addition of sulfur dioxide (SO₂) become very popular for consumers and such wines are increasingly present on the market. Recent studies also showed that Bordeaux red wines without added SO₂ could be differentiated from a sensory point of view from similar wines produced with SO₂¹. Thus, the aim of the current study was to characterize from a sensory point of view, specific aromas of wines without added SO₂ and to identify compounds involved.