terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 OENOLOGICAL STRATEGIES FOR THE REMOVAL OF PINKING IN WHITE WINE

OENOLOGICAL STRATEGIES FOR THE REMOVAL OF PINKING IN WHITE WINE

Abstract

The pinking of in white wine is the turning of color from yellow to salmon hue. White wines obtained from certain grape varieties (e.g. Chardonnay, Sauvignon blanc, Riesling, Trebbiano di Lugana) showed to be susceptible to pinking [1] that has been evaluated by an assay providing the addition of hydrogen peroxide. Even if its appearance does not seem to affect the sensory properties [2], strategies are necessary for its removal. Nowadays, the treatment with polyvinylpolipirroline (PVPP) was reported to significantly decrease the pink color [3]. To assess other additives and co-adjuvants suitable for pinking removal, this study aimed to identify the wine treatment(s) most effective for achieving this purpose.

A white wine showing the pinking fault was added with several additives and co-adjuvants, including active charcoals (bleaching and deodorizing), bentonites, gelatine, PVPP, PVI/PVP, chitosan, potassium caseinate, kaolin, zeolite, silica, calcium phytate, oenological tannins (oak and grape skin), glutathione, ascorbic acid (without/with sulfur dioxide) yeast derivatives for a total of 23 removal assays. The wines were stored up to 26 days and their susceptibility to pinking was carried out at 4 sampling points (day 1, 5, 15 and 26) through the hydrogen peroxide test. The wine was considered susceptible to pinking (SP) when an increase of 5 mAU was observed at 500 nm [4]. Moreover, the pink color index at 500 nm (wit-hout hydrogen peroxide) was determined.

No change in the pink color index was found with the exception of potassium caseinate. Some of the tested additives and co-adjuvants were not effective in limiting SP, including active charcoals, bentonite, gelatine, kaolin, zeolite, silica, grape skin tannin, glutathione and ascorbic acid. For some of them, an increased SP was evidenced (e.g. kaolin, zeolite, grape skin tannin). The treatment with PVI/PVP strongly decreased the pinking susceptibility already after 1 day. In this condition, the wine was not SP anymore at day 15. For this sampling time, three of the yeast derivatives tested, chitosan, PVPP, potassium caseinate and oak tannins limited the pinking susceptibility. The addition of PVPP, the mainly used co-adjuvant, did not result the most relevant one to solve such significant color change. Further study will investigate the selected additives and co-adjuvants in other pink wines as well as in combination in order to identify the most promising treatment for the pinking removal.

 

1. Andrea-Silva, J., Cosme, F., Ribeiro, L. F., Moreira, A. S. P., Malheiro, A. C., Coimbra, M. A., Domingues, M. R. M., & Nunes, F. M. (2014). Origin of the pinking phenomenon of white wines. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry, 62, 5651–5659. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf500825h
2. Nel, A.P., du Toit, W.J., & van Jaarsveld, F.P. (2021). Sensory evaluation of pinked Sauvignon blanc wines. South African Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 42, 175-183. http://dx.doi.org/10.21548/42-2-4316
3. Simpson R., Miller G., Orr L. (1982). Oxidative pinking of white wines: recent observations. Food technology in Australia, 34, 
44- 47.
4. Simpson R.F. (1977). Oxidative pinking in white wines. Vitis, 16, 286-286.

DOI:

Publication date: February 9, 2024

Issue: OENO Macrowine 2023

Type: Poster

Authors

Daniela Fracassetti1,*, Francesca Domenighini¹, Alessio Altomare¹, Maria Manara², Antonio Tirelli¹

1. Department of Food, Environmental and Nutritional Sciences (DeFENS), Università degli Studi di Milano, Via G. Celoria 2, 20133 Milan, Italy
2. Research and Developments, Dal Cin S.p.a., Via I Maggio 67, 20863 Concorezzo, Italy 

Contact the author*

Keywords

Wine treatments, PVI/PVP, Chitosan, Yeast derivatives

Tags

IVES Conference Series | oeno macrowine 2023 | oeno-macrowine

Citation

Related articles…

PROBING GRAPEVINE-BOTRYTIS CINEREA INTERACTION THROUGH MASS SPECTROMETRY IMAGING

Plants in their natural environment are in continuous interaction with large numbers of potentially pathogenic and beneficial microorganisms. Depending on the microbe, plants have evolved a variety of resistance mechanisms that can be constitutively expressed or induced. Phytoalexins, which are biocidal compounds of low to medium molecular weight synthesized by and accumulated in plants as a response to stress, take part in this intricate defense system.1,2
One of the limitations of our knowledge of phytoalexins is the difficulty of analyzing their spatial responsiveness occurring during plant- pathogen interactions under natural conditions.

HOW DO ROOTSTOCKS AFFECT CABERNET SAUVIGNON AROMATIC EXPRESSION?

Grape quality potential for wine production is strongly influenced by environmental parameters such as climate and agronomic factors such as rootstock. Several studies underline the effect of rootstock on vegetative growth of the scions [1] and on berry composition [2, 3] with an impact on wine quality. Rootstocks are promising agronomic tools for climate change adaptation and in most grape-growing regions the potential diversity of rootstocks is not fully used and only a few genotypes are planted. Little is known about the effect of rootstock genetic variability on the aromatic composition in wines; thus further investigations are needed.

MOUSY OFF-FLAVOURS IN WINES: UNVEILING THE MICROORGANISMS BEHIND IT

Taints and off-flavours are one of the major concerns in the wine industry and even if the issues provoked by them are harmless, they can still have a negative impact on the quality or on the visual perception of the consumer. Nowadays, the frequency of occurrence of mousy off-flavours in wines has increased.
The reasons behind this could be the significant decrease in sulphur dioxide addition during processing, the increase in pH or even the trend for spontaneous fermentation in wine. This off-flavour is associated with Brettanomyces bruxellensis or some lactic acid bacteria metabolisms.

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.

DETERMINATION OF FREE AMINO ACIDS, AMINO ACID POTENTIAL AND PROTEASE ACTIVITY IN THE LEES AND STILL WINES OF CHAMPAGNE

Prior to winemaking, organic or mineral nitrogen compound concentrations are usually measured in the vineyard and in grape musts. These indicators facilitate vine cultivation decisions, usually through yield or vigor. During vinification, yeast and bacteria metabolize nitrogen compounds in the musts in order to generate biomass. After fermentation, the microorganisms rerelease a part of this nitrogen as soluble compounds into the wines. Another part remains bound in the lees and can be lost during racking. The must’s natural nitrogen quantities, additional supplements during fermentation, and lees contact management enhance the release of nitrogen compounds to the wines. During ageing these nitrogen compounds – primarily the amino acids – are implicated in the generation of odorous compounds such as heterocycles(1).