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…

PRECISE AND SUSTAINABLE OENOLOGY THROUGH THE OPTIMIZED USE OF AD- JUVANTS: A BENTONITE-APPLIED MODEL OF STUDY TO EXPLOIT

As wine resilience is the result of different variables, including the wine pH and the concentration of wine components, a detailed knowledge of the relationships between the adjuvant to attain stability and the oenological medium is fundamental for process optimization and to increase wine durability till the time of consumption.

WINE LEES AS A SOURCE OF NITROGEN FOR OENOCOCCUS OENI TO IMPROVE MALOLACTIC FERMENTATION PERFORMANCE

Malolactic fermentation (MLF) is a desired process in red and acidic white wines, after alcoholic fermentation (AF), carried out by the lactic acid bacterium (LAB) Oenococcus oeni. The advantages are an increase of pH, microbiological stabilization and organoleptic improvement of the final wine. However, the presence of stress factors such as ethanol, low pH, high total SO2, lack of nutrients and presence of inhibitors, could affect the successful completion of MLF [1]. Changes in amino acid composition and deficiencies in peptides after AF, showed that MLF can be delayed, signaling its importance for bacterial growth and L-malic acid degradation during MLF [2].

FUNCTIONALIZED MESOPOROUS SILICA IS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO BENTONITE FOR WINE PROTEIN STABILIZATION

The presence of grape-derived heat unstable proteins can lead to haze formation in white wines [1], an instability prevented by removing these proteins by adding bentonite, a hydrated aluminum silicate that interacts electrostatically with wine proteins leading to their flocculation. Despite effective, using bentonite has several drawbacks as the costs associated with its use, the potential negative effects on wine quality, and its environmental impact, so that alternative solutions are needed.

THE IMPACT OF NON-SACCHAROMYCES YEASTS ON THE WHITE WINE QUALITY

Selected strains of non-Saccharomyces yeasts showed a positive effect on sensory characteristics and aromatic complexity of wine. A sequential microbial culture of non-Saccharomyces and S. cerevisiae species is usually inoculated due to poorer fermentability of non-Saccharomyces species. The aim of the study was to investigate the role of non-Saccharomyces yeasts in the production of white wines. We evaluated how individual combinations of sequential inoculations of non-Saccharomyces and S. cerevisiae species affect the aromatic compounds (volatile thiols and esters) and sensory characteristics of the wines.

INSIGHT THE IMPACT OF GRAPE PRESSING ON MUST COMPOSITION

The pre-fermentative steps play a relevant role for the characteristics of white wine [1]. In particular, the grape pressing can affect the chemical composition and sensory profile and its optimized management leads to the desired extraction of aromas and their precursors, and phenols resulting in a balanced wine [2-4]. These aspects are important especially for must addressed to the sparkling wine as appropriate extraction of phenols is expected being dependent to grape composition, as well.