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…

CHANGES IN METABOLIC FLUXES UNDER LOW PH GROWTH CONDITIONS: CAN THE SLOWDOWN OF CITRATE CONSUMPTION IMPROVE OENOCOCCUS OENI ACID-TOLERANCE?

Oenococcus oeni is the main Lactic Acid Bacteria responsible for malolactic fermentation, converting malic acid into lactic acid and carbon dioxide in wines. Following the alcoholic fermentation, this second fermentation ensures a deacidification and remains essential for the release of aromatic notes and the improvement of microbial stability in many wines. Nevertheless, wine is a harsh environment for microbial growth, especially because of its low pH (between 2.9 and 3.6 depending on the type of wine) and nutrient deficiency. In order to maintain homeostasis and ensure viability, O. oeni possesses different cellular mechanisms including organic acid metabolisms which represent also the major pathway to synthetize energy in wine.

VOLATILE AND GLYCOSYLATED MARKERS OF SMOKE IMPACT: EVOLUTION IN BOTTLED WINE

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. The impact on wine aroma is mainly attributed to volatile phenols, while in-mouth hydrolysis of glycosylated forms may be responsible for long-lasting “ashy” aftertastes (1).

INSIGHTS ON THE ROLE OF GENES ON AROMA FORMATION OF WINES

Yeast secondary metabolism is a complex network of biochemical pathways and the genetic profile of the yeast carrying out the alcoholic fermentation is obviously important in the formation of the metabolites conferring specific odors to wine. The aim of the present research was to investigate the relative expression of genes involved in flavor compound production in eight different Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains.
Two commercial yeast strains Sc1 (S.cerevisiae x S.bayanus) and Sc2 (S.cerevisiae) and six indigenous S. cerevisiae strains (Sc3, Sc4, Sc5, Sc6, Sc7, Sc8) isolated during spontaneous fermentations were inoculated in Assyrtiko and Vidiano grape must.

Grouping Vitis vinifera grapevine varieties based on their aromatic composition

Climate change is likely to impact wine typicity across the globe, raising concerns in wine regions historically renowned for the quality of their terroir1. Amongst several changes in viticultural practices, replacing some of the planting material (i.e. clones, rootstocks and cultivars) is thought to be one of the most promising potential levers to be used for adapting to climate change. But the change of cultivars also involves the issue of protecting the region’s wine typicity. In Bordeaux (France), extensive research has been conducted on identifying meridional varieties that could be good candidates to help guard against the effects of climate change2 while less research has been done concerning their impacts on Bordeaux wine typicity.

ESTIMATING THE INITIAL OXYGEN RELEASE (IOR) OF CORK CLOSURES

Many factors influence aging of bottled wine, oxygen transfer through the closure is included. The maximum uptake of wine before oxidation begins varies from 60 mg.L-¹ to 180 mg.L-1 for white and red wines respectively [1].
The process of bottling may lead to considerable amounts of oxygen. The actual contribution of the transfer through the closure system becomes relevant at the bottle storage, but the amounts are small compared to prepacking operations [2] and to the total oxygen attained during filling.