OENO IVAS 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Comparing the effects of vision, smell and taste in red wine quality judgments by experts: sensory cues, mental imagery and verbal representations as drivers of consensus in the multisensory space

Comparing the effects of vision, smell and taste in red wine quality judgments by experts: sensory cues, mental imagery and verbal representations as drivers of consensus in the multisensory space

Abstract

In this study, we evaluated the contributions of vision, smell and taste to red wine quality judgments by expert wine tasters. Whereas previous studies specified the modulating effects of gustatory traits [1], culture and expertise [2, 3], our objective was to gain a better understanding of the perceptual mechanisms, with special consideration of the psychological representations that predict consensus in red wine quality judgments. To this aim, we compared wine tasters’ responses in unconstrained (i.e., all senses involved) and constrained wine tastings (i.e., unisensory: “visual”, “smell” and “taste”; multisensory: “visual-smell”, “visual-taste” and “taste-smell”) over six wine tasting sessions. In each session, wine tasters rated the quality of 20 red wines from a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO, premium vs. secondary wines), starting with an unconstrained tasting and then followed by a constrained tasting. We also collated predictors based on wine tasters’ responses to self-report questionnaires that assessed vividness of mental imagery in visual, smell, taste, somesthetic and wine contexts. Using a series of vocabulary tasks, we also evaluated whether lexical capacity predicts consensus in red wine quality judgments. 

Overall, our results showed a coherent quality concept across unconstrained and constrained wine tastings, with a clear quality distinction favoring premium wines. However, principal component analyses suggested a better quality judgement consensus with unisensory vision cues compared to all other sensory conditions. Going further, regression analyses also revealed specific drivers of red wine quality judgment consensus that are based on age, vividness of wine mental imagery, lexical capacity and consensus, as well as unisensory smell consensus and to a lesser degree, multisensory visual-taste consensus and unisensory taste consensus. 

Common experiences with wine, as well as the number of years tasting might promote strong vividness for wine representations (images and vocabulary), which in turn help predict wine tasters’ inclusion to the consensus involved with red wine quality judgments. Taken together, this study gives us an insightful look at the individual knowledge base, as well as the experience and representational cues that could delineate expert status. Further research in this direction could help promote informed teaching curricula in professional training and expert wine tasting.

[1] Saenz-Navajas, M.-P., Avizcuri, J.-M., Ballester, J., Fernandez-Zurbano, P., Ferreira, V., Peyron, D., et al. (2015). Sensory-active compounds influencing wine experts’ and consumers’ perception of red wine intrinsic quality. LWT – Food Science and Technology, 60, 400–411. 
[2] Saenz-Navajas, M.-P., Ballester, J., Pecher, C., Peyron, D., and Valentin, D. (2013). Sensory drivers of intrinsic quality of red wines: Effect of cultures and level of expertise. Food Research International, 54, 1506–1518. 
[3] Valentin, D., Parr, W. V., Peyron, D., Grose, C., and Ballester, J. (2016). Colour as a driver of Pinot noir wine quality judgments: An investigation involving French and New Zealand wine professionals. Food Quality and Preference, 48, 251-261.

DOI:

Publication date: June 19, 2020

Issue: OENO IVAS 2019

Type: Article

Authors

André Caissie, Laurent Riquier, Gilles De Revel, Sophie Tempère

Unité de recherche Oenologie, EA 4577, USC 1366 INRA, ISVV, Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux INP, F33882 Villenave d’Ornon France
INRA, ISVV, USC 1366 OEnologie, F-33140, Villenave d’Ornon, France.

Contact the author

Keywords

Wine tasting, Perceptual mechanisms, Mental Imagery, Vocabulary

Tags

IVES Conference Series | OENO IVAS 2019

Citation

Related articles…

Aromatic maturity is a cornerstone of terroir expression in red wine

Harvesting grapes at adequate maturity is key to the production of high-quality red wines. Enologists and wine makers define several types of maturity, including technical maturity, phenolic maturity and aromatic maturity. Technical maturity and phenolic maturity are relatively well documented in the scientific literature, while articles on aromatic maturity are scarcer. This is surprising, because aromatic maturity is, without a doubt, the most important of the three in determining wine quality and typicity (including terroir expression). Optimal terroir expression can be obtained when the different types of maturity are reached at the same time, or within a short time frame. This is more likely to occur when the ripening takes place under mild temperatures, neither too cool, nor too hot. Aromatic expression in wine can be driven, from low to high maturity, by green, herbal, fresh fruit, ripe fruit, jammy fruit, candied fruit or cooked fruit aromas. Green and cooked fruit aromas are not desirable in red wines, while the levels of other aromatic compounds contribute to the typicity of the wine in relation to its origin. Wines produced in cool climates, or on cool soils in temperate climates, are likely to express herbal or fresh fruit aromas; while wines produced under warm climates, or on warm soils in temperate climates, may express ripe fruit, jammy fruit or candied fruit aromas. Growers can optimize terroir expression through their choice of grapevine variety. Early ripening varieties perform better in cool climates and late ripening varieties in warm climates. Additionally, maturity can be advanced or delayed by different canopy management practices or training systems.

Climate and the evolving mix of grape varieties in Australia’s wine regions

The purpose of this study is to examine the changing mix of winegrape varieties in Australia so as to address the question: In the light of key climate indicators and predictions of further climate change, how appropriate are the grape varieties currently planted in Australia’s wine regions? To achieve this, regions are classified into zones according to each region’s climate variables, particularly average growing season temperature (GST), leaving aside within-region variations in climates. Five different climatic classifications are reported. Using projections of GSTs for the mid- and late 21st century, the extent to which each region is projected to move from its current zone classification to a warmer one is reported. Also shown is the changing proportion of each of 21 key varieties grown in a GST zone considered to be optimal for premium winegrape production. Together these indicators strengthen earlier suggestions that the mix of varieties may be currently less than ideal in many Australian wine regions, and would become even less so in coming decades if that mix was not altered in the anticipation of climate change. That is, grape varieties in many (especially the warmest) regions will have to keep changing, or wineries will have to seek fruit from higher latitudes or elevations if they wish to retain their current mix of varieties and wine styles.

Variety and climatic effects on quality scores in the Western US winegrowing regions

Wine quality is strongly linked to climate. Quality scores are often driven by climate variation across different winegrowing regions and years, but also influenced by other aspects of terroir, including variety. While recent work has looked at the relationship between quality scores and climate across many European regions, less work has examined New World winegrowing regions. Here we used scores from three major rating systems (Wine Advocate, Wine Enthusiast and Wine Spectator) combined with daily climate and phenology data to understand what drives variation across wine quality scores in major regions of the Western US, including regions in California, Oregon and Washington. We examined effects of variety, region, and in what phenological period climate was most predictive of quality. As in other studies, we found climate, based mainly on growing degree day (GDD) models, was generally associated with quality—with higher GDD associated with higher scores—but variety and region also had strong effects. Effects of region were generally stronger than variety. Certain varieties received the highest scores in only some areas, while other varieties (e.g., Merlot) generally scored lower across regions. Across phenological stages, GDD during budbreak was often most strongly associated with quality. Our results support other studies that warmer periods generally drive high quality wines, but highlight how much region and variety drive variation in scores outside of climate.

Influence of agronomic practices in soil water content in mid-mountain vineyards

In the context of LIFE project MIDMACC (LIFE18 CCA/ES/001099), several pilots have been installed in vineyards in mid mountain areas of Catalonia (NE Spain) to test well stablished agronomic practices to increase the adaptation of Mediterranean mid mountain to climate change. Soil water content (SWC) at three different depths (15, 30 and 45cm) was measured in continuum from August 2020. One pilot (WC) included a well-established green cover (GC), a new GC (NC) and a conventional soil management (CM, tilling+herbicides). NC presented an intermediate state between WC and CM, responding similarly to CM in autumn but quickly reaching similar SWC to WC, then following the same evolution till next spring, with CM presenting lower values along autumn and winter. Then vegetation activation decreased SWC in all plots, (much slower in CM, lacking GC). Sensibility to spring rains is again intermediate for NC, which joins SWC evolution of CM by the end of spring till next autumn. It is expected that NC will resemble WC more and more as its GC develops. In the pilot combining vine training (VSP vs Gobelet) and hillside management (slope vs terrace), no clear pattern could be related with these conditions. However, both terraces seem to be more sensitive to spring rains. A third pilot included new vineyards (7 and 1 year old). In the new vineyard (N), higher canopy development, a spontaneous green cover and row straw resulted in a slower SWC dynamic, not so sensitive to rains but conserving more soil water in spring and most of summer, even with presumably a higher water extraction by vines. In the newest vineyard (VN) the deepest sensor is still sensitive to rain events all over the year and SWC is always highest at this depth, revealing small water capture by vines.

The impact of leaf canopy management on eco-physiology, wood chemical properties and microbial communities in root, trunk and cordon of Riesling grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.)

In the last decades, climate change required already adaptation of vineyard management. Increase in temperature and unexpected weather events cause changes in all phenological stages requiring new management tools. For example, defoliation can be a useful tool to reduce the sugar content in the berries creating differences in the wine profiles. In a ten-year field experiment using Riesling (Vitis vinifera L, planted 1986, Geisenheim, Germany), various mechanical defoliation strategies and different intensities were trialed until 2016 before the vineyard was uprooted. Wood was sampled from the plant compartments root, trunk, cordon and shoot for analyses of physicochemical properties (e.g. lignin and element content, pH, diameter), nonstructural carbohydrates and the microbial communities. The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of reduced canopy leaf area on the sink-source allocation into different compartments and potential changes of the fungal and prokaryotic wood-inhabiting community using a metabarcoding approach. Severe summer pruning (SSP) of the canopy and mechanical defoliation (MDC) above the bunch zone decreased the leaf area by 50% compared to control (C). SSP reduced the photosynthetic capacity, which resulted in an altered source-sink allocation and carbohydrate storage. With lower leaf area, less carbohydrates are allocated. This for example resulted in a decreased trunk diameter. Further, it affected the composition of the grapevine wood microbiota. SSP and MDC management changed significantly the prokaryotic community composition in wood of the root samples, but had no effect in other compartments. In general, this study found strong compartment and less management effects of the microbial community composition and associated physicochemical properties. The highest microbial diversities were identified in the wood of the trunk, and several species were recorded the first time in grapevine.