THE FLAVANOL PROFILE OF SKIN, SEED, WINES, AND POMACE ARE CHARACTERISTIC OF EACH TYPOLOGY AND CONTRIBUTES TO UNDERSTAND THE FLAVAN- 3-OLS EXTRACTION DURING RED WINEMAKING

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.

The balance between the different flavours of a wine largely determines its perception and appreciation by the consumers. In white wines, sweetness and sourness are usually the two poles balancing the taste properties. The bitter flavour, on the other hand, is frequently associated with a loss of equilibrium and all white wines (dry and sweet, young and aged) are affected.
Several bitter compounds are already well-described in wines.

Under standard wine tasting conditions, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) responsible for the wine’s bouquet progressively invade the glass headspace above the wine surface. Most of wines being complex water/ethanol mixtures (with typically 10-15 % ethanol by volume), gaseous ethanol is therefore undoubtedly the most abundant VOC in the glass headspace [1]. Yet, gaseous ethanol is known to have a multimodal influence on wine’s perception [2]. Of particular importance to flavor perception is the effect of ethanol on the release of aroma compounds into the headspace of the beverage [1].

Wine regions are getting warmer as average temperatures continue raising affecting grape growth, berry composition and wine production. Berry quality was evaluated in plants of Vitis vinifera cv Syrah grafted on two rootstocks, Paulsen (PL1103) and SO4, and grown under two salinity concentrations (LS:0.7dS/m and HS:2.5dSm-1) in combination with two irrigation regimes (HW:133% and CW:100%), being the seasonal water application 483mm (control, 100%). Spectrophotometer measurements from berry skin during veraison and harvest stages and from “young” wine samples, were indicative of the stressors effect and the mediation of the rootstocks. At veraison (i) total phenolics content were high under LSHW (0.7dSm-1 and high water conditions) for SO4 and PL1103.

In the last decades the use of bioestimulants in viticulture have been promoted as alternative to conven- tional pesticides. Moreover, as bioestimulants promote the biosynthesis of secondary metabolites in grape berries, several studies had investigated their influence on the accumulation of phenolic com- pounds (Monteiro et al., 2022). However, few studies, so far, are focused on the accumulation of the vo- latile compounds and their impact on the produced wines (Giménez-Bañón et al., 2022; Gomez- Plaza et al., 2012; Ruiz Garcia et al., 2014).
This study was conducted in a single vineyard of white autochthonous grapevine variety Savvatia- no (Vitis vinifera L.) in Muses Valley (Askri, Viotia, Greece). Chitosan (CHT), Abscisic Acid (ABA) and Benzothiadiazole (BTH) were applied.