terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 VOLATILE COMPOSITION OF WINES USING A GC/TOFMS: HS-SPME VS MICRO LLE AS SAMPLE PREPARATION METHODOLOGY

VOLATILE COMPOSITION OF WINES USING A GC/TOFMS: HS-SPME VS MICRO LLE AS SAMPLE PREPARATION METHODOLOGY

Abstract

Wine aroma analysis can be done by sensorial or instrumental analysis, the latter involving several methodologies based on olfactometric detection, electronic noses or gas chromatography. Gas Chromato-graphy has been widely used for the study of the volatile composition of wines and depending on the detection system coupled to the chromatographic system, quantification and identification of individual compounds can be achieved.

Prior to the chromatography, a sample preparation step is almost always required, but unfortunately there is no extraction procedure that can aid in the detection of the wide range of volatile compounds that exists in a wine sample. Wine volatile profile is characterized to have thousands of compounds with varying chemical properties, like molecular weight, structure, polarity and molecular structures. Moreover, they exist in a wide range of concentration, which, sometimes implies that a pre-concentration step is also required, if the ones existing in very low concentrations are of interest. As far as sample preparation methods for the analysis of wine aroma concerns, one can found thousands of bibliographic references, but the most used ones are probably the liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) and the solid-phase microextraction (SPME). Extensive reviews on the different sample preparation methods that has been used for wine analysis, along with each one advantages and drawbacks, has already received researcher’s attention (Costa Freitas et al, 2012)

In light of the above, this work intents to discuss the use of two different sample preparation methods to quantify and identify volatile compounds in wines.

Two sample preparation methods were compared: a micro liquid-liquid extraction with 500mL of dichloromethane (based on Vilanova et al, 2010) and a HS-SPME (based on Pereira et al 2021). Chromatographic method was the same for both sample preparation method.

The number of compounds identified by HS-SPME was higher than the ones identified by micro-LLE. 26 compounds were identified in wines by both sample preparation methods. Since the majority of com-pounds identified by each sample preparation methodologies are different, choose to do one or another, or even both, should be taken into consideration when the goal is to go deep on volatile composition of wines.

 

1. M. Costa Freitas; M. D. R. Gomes da Silva; M. J. Cabrita (2012) “Sampling and sample preparation techniques for the determination of volatile components in grape juice, wine and alcoholic beverages” In Comprehensive Sampling and Sample Preparation. Volume 4, Pawliszyn J., Mondello L., Dugo P. Eds; Elsevier, Academic Press: Oxford, UK, pp 27–41, 2012. ISBN: 9780123813732
2. Singleton, V. e Rossi, J. (1965) Colorimetry of Total Phenolic Compounds with Phosphomolybdic-Phosphotungstic Acid Reagents. American Journal of Enology and Viticultura, 16, 144-158.
3. Mar Vilanova, Zlatina Genisheva, Antón Masa, José Maria Oliveira (2010). Correlation between volatile composition and sensory properties in Spanish Albariño wines. Microchemical Journal, 95, 240-246.
4. Pereira, C., Mendes, D., Dias, T., Garcia, R., da Silva, M. and Cabrita, M., 2021. Revealing the yeast modulation potential on amino acid composition and volatile profile of Arinto white wines by a combined chromatographic-based approach. Journal of Chromatography A, 1641, p.461991.

DOI:

Publication date: February 9, 2024

Issue: OENO Macrowine 2023

Type: Poster

Authors

Nuno Martins¹, Maria João Cabrita1,2 Raquel Garcia1,2

1. MED—Mediterranean Institute for Agriculture, Environment and Development & CHANGE—Global Change and Sustainabi-lity Institute, Universidade de Évora, Pólo da Mitra, Ap. 94, 7006-554 Évora, Portugal
2. Departamento de Fitotecnia, Escola de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade de Évora, Pólo da Mitra, Ap. 94, 7006-554 Évora, Portugal

Contact the author*

Keywords

red wine, volatiles, sample preparation, GC/TOFMS

Tags

IVES Conference Series | oeno macrowine 2023 | oeno-macrowine

Citation

Related articles…

IMPACT OF ACIDIFICATION AT BOTTLING BY FUMARIC ACID ON RED WINE AFTER 2 YEARS

Global warming is responsible for a lack of organic acid in grape berries, leading to wines with higher pH and lower titrable acidity. The chemical, microbiological and organoleptic equilibriums are impacted by this change of organic acid concentration. It is common practice to acidify the wine in order to prevent these imbalances that can lead to wine defects and early spoilage. Tartaric acid (TA) is most commonly used by winemaker for wine acidification purposes. Fumaric acid (FA), which is authorized by the OIV in its member states for the inhibition of malolactic fermentation, could also be used as a potential acidification candidate since it has a better acidifying power than tartaric acid.

ACCUMULATION OF GRAPE METABOLITES IS DIFFERENTLY IMPACTED BY WATER DEFICIT AT THE BERRY AND PLANT LEVELS IN NEW FUNGUS DISEASE-TOLERANT GENOTYPES

The use of new fungus disease-tolerant varieties is a promising long-term solution to better manage chemical input in viticulture, but unfortunately little is known regarding these new hybrids fruit development and metabolites accumulation in front of abiotic stresses such as water deficit (WD). Thus, prior to the adoption of such varieties by the wine industry in Mediterranean regions, there is a need to consider their suitability to WD.

VALORIZATION OF GRAPE WINE POMACE USING PULSED ELECTRIC FIELDS (PEF) AND SUPERCRITICAL CO₂ (SC CO₂) EXTRACTION

Wine grape pomace quantitatively and qualitatively represents the most important fraction of wine waste. Namely, this by-product makes ~ 20% of the total mass of vinified grapes, and it is characterized with high concentrations of polyphenolic antioxidants, as well as grape seed oil. Hence, valorization of wine pomace, as an alternative to traditionally employed disposal, has drown considerable interest in recent years. Earlier studies were mostly focused on the extraction of phenolics, while mechanisms enhancing the extraction of lipid fraction from grape pomace, as well as their impact on the grape seed oil quality are far less investigated.

NEW INSIGHTS INTO THE FATE OF MARKERS INVOLVED IN FRESH MUSHROOM OFF-FLAVOURS DURING ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATION

The fresh mushroom off-flavour (FMOff) has been appearing in wines since the 2000s. Some C8 compounds such as 1-octen-3-one, 1-octen-3-ol, 1-hydroxyoctan-3-one, 3-octanol and others are involved in this specific off-flavour [1-3]. At the same time, glycosidic precursors of some FMOff compounds have been identified in musts contaminated by Crustomyces subabruptus [4], highlighting the role of aroma precursors in this specific taint. However, the fate of these volatile molecules and glycosidic fractions during fermentation is not well known.

MODULATION OF YEAST-DERIVED AROMA COMPOUNDS IN CHARDONNAY WINES USING ENCAPSULATED DIAMMONIUM PHOSPHATE TO CONTROL NUTRIENT RELEASE

Yeast-derived aroma compounds are the result of different and complex biochemical pathways that mainly occur during alcoholic fermentation. Many of them are related -but not limited- to the availability of nutrients in the fermentation medium and linked to nitrogen metabolism and biomass produced. Besides, the metabolic phase of yeast also regulates the expression of many enzymes involved in the formation of aroma active compounds. The work investigates the overall effect of continuous supplementation of nutrients during alcoholic fermentation of a grape must on the volatile composition of wines.