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…

MOVING FROM SULFITES TO BIOPROTECTION: WHICH IMPACT ON CHARDONNAY WINE?

Over the last few years, several tools have been developed to reduce the quantity of sulfites used during winemaking, including bioprotection. Although its effectiveness in preventing the development of spoilage microorganisms has been proven, few data are available on the impact of sulfite substitution by bioprotection on the final product. The objective of this study was therefore to characterize Chardonnay wines with the addition of sulfite or bioprotection in the pre-fermentation stage. The effects of both treatments on resulting matrices was evaluated at several scales: analysis of classical oenological parameters, antioxidant capacity, phenolic compounds, non-volatile metabolome and sensory profile.

DEVELOPMENT OF DISTILLATION SENSORS FOR SPIRIT BEVERAGES PRODUCTION MONITORING BASED ON IMPEDANCE SPECTROSCOPY MEASUREMENT AND PARTIAL LEAST SQUARES REGRESSION (PLS-R)

During spirit beverages production, the distillate is divided in three parts: the head, the heart, and the tail. Acetaldehyde and ethanol are two key markers which allow the correct separation of distillate. Being toxic, the elimination of the head part, which contains high concentration of acetaldehyde, is crucial to guarantee the consumer’s health and security. Plus, the tail should be separated from the heart based on ethanol concentration.

DOES LIGNIN AN ACCEPTABLE MARKER OF GRAPESEED MATURATION AND QUALITY?

Usually the winemaker consider polyphenols from the grape berry as an actor of the wine quality. There are frequently consider as a marker of grape maturity. It is commonly known that winemaker consider tannins and anthocyanins as main polyphenol actors for winemaking practices and wine quality. Here we will focus on the characterisation of lignins in grape seeds. Previous studies suggest that the seed is lignified [1], which could explain the change in colour of the seed when it reaches maturity and thus provide a reliable indicator for describing the maturity stage in the seed.

EFFECT OF FUMARIC ACID ON SPONTANEOUS FERMENTATION IN GRAPE MUST

Malolactic fermentation (MLF)¹, the decarboxylation of L-malic acid into L-lactic acid, is performed by lactic acid bacteria (LAB). MLF has a deacidifying effect that may compromise freshness or microbiological stability in wines² and can be inhibited by fumaric acid [E297] (FA). In wine, can be added at a maximum allowable dose of 0.6 g/L³. Its inhibition with FA is being studied as an alternative strategy to minimize added doses of SO₂⁴. In addition, wine yeasts are capable of metabolizing and storing small amounts of FA and during alcoholic fermentation (AF).

GRAPE SPIRITS FOR PORT WINE PRODUCTION: SCREENING THEIR AROMA PROFILE

Port is a fortified wine, produced from grapes grown in the demarcated Douro region. The fortification process consists in the addition of a grape spirit (77% v/v) to the fermenting juice for fermentation interruption, resulting in remaining residual sugars in the wine and increased alcohol content (19-22%). The approval of grape spirits follows the Appellation (D.O. Port wine) rules1 and it is currently carried out based on analytical control and on sensory evaluation done by the public Institute that upholds the control of the quality of Douro Appellation wines. However, the producers of Port wines would like to have more information about quality markers of grape spirits.