ASSESSMENT OF ‘DOLCETTO’ GRAPES AND WINES FROM DIFFERENT AREAS OF OVADA DOCG

The definition of the term “quality” in sensory evaluation of food products does not seem to be consensual. Descriptive or liking methods are generally used to differentiate between wines (Lawless et al., 1997). Nevertheless, quality evaluation of a product such as wine can also relate to emotional aspects. As exposed by Costell (2002), product quality is defined as an integrated impression, like acceptability, pleasure, or emotional experiences during tasting. According to the ‘modality appropriateness’ hypothesis which predicts that wine tasters weigh the most suitable sensory inputs for a specific assess- ment (Freides, 1974; Welch & Warren, 1980), the nature of the quality definitions may modulate sensory influences.

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.

Right after the pouring of wine in a glass, a myriad of volatile organic compounds, including ethanol, overwhelm the glass headspace, thus causing the so-called wine’s bouquet [1]. Otherwise, it is worth noting that during wine tasting, most people automatically swirl their glass to enhance the release of aromas in the glass headspace [1]. About a decade ago, Swiss researchers revealed the complex fluid mechanics underlying wine swirling [2]. However, despite mechanically repeated throughout wine tasting, the consequences of glass swirling on the chemical space found in the headspace of wine glasses are still barely known.

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].

Mannoproteins (MPs) are proteoglycans from the outmost layer of yeast cell walls released into wine during alcoholic fermentation and ageing on lees processes. The use of commercial preparations of mannoproteins as additives to improve wine stability with regards to the crystallization of tartaric salts and to prevent protein haze in the case of white and rosé wines is authorized by the OIV.
Regarding red wines and polyphenols, mannoproteins are described as able to improve their colloidal stability and modulate the astringent effect of condensed tannins. The latter interact with salivary proteins forming insoluble aggregates that cause a loss of lubrication in the mouth and promote a drying and puckering sensation. However, neither the interaction mechanisms involved in mannoproteins capacity to impact astringency nor the structure-function relationships related to this property are fully understood.