IDENTIFYING POTENTIAL CHEMICAL MARKERS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PERMISSIVENESS OF BORDEAUX RED WINES AGAINST BRETTANOMYCES BRUXELLENSIS USING UNTARGETED METABOLOMICS

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

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, described as “smoky”, “bacon”, “campfire” and “ashtray”, often long-lasting and lingering on the palate. In cases of large wildfire events, economic losses for all wine industry actors can be devastating.

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.

This paper focuses on how taste in wine (and other foods) changes and the implications of this process
for producers and merchants.
It draws primarily on the changing taste of and taste for champagne in Britain in the 19th century. Between 1850 and 1880 champagne went from a dosage level of around 20% (20 grams sugar / litre) to 0%. Champagne became the ‘dinner wine of the elite – drunk with roast meat and savoury dishes.
Contemporaries accepted that while most people could distinguish the taste of good champagne from that of bad, very few could distinguish very good from good.

Nitrogen (N) nutrition of the vineyard strongly influences the must and the wine compositions. Several chemical markers present in wine (i.e., proline, succinic acid, higher alcohols and phenolic compounds) have been proposed for the cultivar Chasselas, as indicators of N deficiency in the grape must at harvest [1]. Grape genetics potentially influences the impact of N deficiency on grape composition, as well as on the concentration of potential indicators in the wine. The goal of this study was to evaluate if the che- mical markers found in Chasselas wine can be extended for other white wines to indicate N deficiency in the grape must.