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…

ACIDIC AND DEMALIC SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE STRAINS FOR MANAGING PROBLEMS OF ACIDITY DURING THE ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATION

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.

VOLATILE AND GLYCOSYLATED MARKERS OF SMOKE IMPACT: LEVELS AND PATTERNS OBSERVED IN 2020 WINES FROM THE UNITED STATES WEST COAST

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.

DEVELOPMENT OF BIOPROSPECTING TOOLS FOR OENOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS

Wine production is a complex biochemical process that involves a heterogeneous microbiota consisting of different microorganisms such as yeasts, bacteria, and filamentous fungi. Among these microorganisms, yeasts play a predominant role in the chemistry of wine, as they actively participate in alcoholic fermentation, a biochemical process that transforms the sugars in grapes into ethanol and carbon dioxide while producing additional by-products. The quality of the final product is greatly influenced by the microbiota present in the grape berry, and the demand for indigenous yeast starters adapted to specific grape must and reflecting the biodiversity of a particular region is increasing. This supports the concept that indigenous yeast strains can be associated with a “terroir”.

ANALYZING THE ROLE OF ELEMENTAL SULFUR IN GRAPE JUICE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF POLYFUNCTIONAL MERCAPTANS IN SAUVIGNON BLANC WINES

Sauvignon blanc is characterized by distinctive aromas, both fruity and herbaceous. The “green” character has been attributed to the methoxypyrazines, while the “fruity” character is associated with polyfunctional mercaptans . Polyfunctional mercaptans are of great significance due to their high impact on wines and associated low perception thresholds.
Elemental sulfur (S⁰) is widely used to protect grapevines from powdery mildew.

POTENTIAL OF PEPTIDASES FOR AVOIDING PROTEIN HAZES IN MUST AND WINE

Haze formation in wine during transportation and storage is an important issue for winemakers, since turbid wines are unacceptable for sale. Such haze often results from aggregation of unstable grape proteinaceous colloids. To date, foreseeably unstable wines need to be treated with bentonite to remove these, while excessive quantities, which are often required, affect the wine volume and quality (Cosme et al. 2020). One solution to avoid these drawbacks might be the use of peptidases. Marangon et al. (2012) reported that Aspergillopepsins I and II were able to hydrolyse the respective haze-relevant proteins in combination with a flash pasteurisation. In 2021, the OIV approved this enzymatic treatment for wine stabilisation (OIV-OENO 541A and 541B).