OENO IVAS 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Does wine expertise influence semantic categorization of wine odors?

Does wine expertise influence semantic categorization of wine odors?

Abstract

Aromatic characterization is a key issue to enhance wines knowledge. While several studies argue the importance of wine expertise in the ability of performing odor-related sensory tasks, there is still little attention paid to the influence of expertise on the semantic representation of wine odors. Theis study aims at exploring the influence of subject’s expertise on the semantic space of wine’s odor. 

156 subjects were recruited (72 % consumers of wine and 28 % professionals from viticulture sector). Subject’ level of expertise was measured by means of a questionnaire encompassing three criteria: product experience, subjective knowledge and objective knowledge. Four groups of subjects were identified using Rasch model corresponding to four levels of expertise: novices, intermediates, connoisseurs and experts. Thereafter, subjects performed a sorting task on 96 labels of odors and add a title to the groups. To investigate the influence of subject’s expertise on the semantic space of wine’s odor, the four groups’ clusters were compared on several criteria: number and size of odor groups from the sorting task and agreement between the subjects within each cluster. Dissimilarity matrices were also compared to highlight differences between clustering. Finally, to represent the semantic odor space, additive similarity trees were performed on sorting data. 

Results show that number and size of odor groups are likely to be the same between the four clusters (between 26 and 31 groups in average and 3 odors per group in average for the four clusters) and no differences of agreement within each cluster can be highlighted. Additive trees performed on clusters show that most of the branches are the same between the two clusters: fruity, floral, woody, vegetal, spicy, etc. Overall, semantic representation of odors is consensual regardless the level of expertise. But, some differences may be underscored. These latter ones are mostly between expert’s cluster and the three other clusters. 

This work highlights that subjects, professionals or not, have the same structuration of wine odor attributes: they categorize odors according to the odorant source. However, some attributes do not have the same meaning for experts and non-experts which lead to a different categorization. This study is the first step toward a sensory tool for wine characterization aiming at simplifying and standardizing the process of describing wine odors, from generic to more specific attributes.

DOI:

Publication date: June 19, 2020

Issue: OENO IVAS 2019

Type: Article

Authors

Léa Koening (1), Cécile Coulon-Leroy (1), Ronan Symoneaux (1), Véronique Cariou (2), Evelyne Vigneau (2)

1) USC 1422 GRAPPE, INRA, Ecole Supérieure d’Agricultures, Univ. Bretagne Loire, SFR 4207 QUASAV, 55 rue Rabelais 49100 Angers, France
2) StatSC, ONIRIS, INRA, 44322 Nantes, France

Contact the author

Keywords

expertise, odor categorization, free sorting, additive tree 

Tags

IVES Conference Series | OENO IVAS 2019

Citation

Related articles…

A novel approach for the identification of new biomarkers of wine consumption in human urine using untargeted metabolomics

Wine is one of the most representative components of Mediterranean diet. Moderate wine intake together with food, has been positively correlated with reduced risk of many chronic diseases. This beneficial effect seems to be ascribed to elevated polyphenolic content of wine [1]. Traditional approaches for the identification of wine biomarkers consumption include targeted metabolomics that focuses on the quantification of well-defined metabolites, losing a valuable information about a massive number of compounds. On the other hand, untargeted metabolomics can disclose a large quantity of signals corresponding to potential biomarkers in a single analysis with high sensitivity and resolution.

Exploring the gene regulatory networks of WRKY family in grapevine (Vitis vinifera  L.) using DAP-Seq

The recent development of regulatory genomics has raised increasing interest in plant research since transcriptional regulation of genes plays a pivotal role in many biological processes. By shedding light on the target genes of the various transcription factors (TFs), it is therefore possible to infer the influence they exert on the different molecular mechanisms. In this regard, the attention was focused on WRKYs, a family of TFs almost exclusively found in plant species. In grapevine, WRKYs are involved in several biological processes, playing a key role in berry development, hormonal balance and signalling, biotic and abiotic stresses responses, and secondary metabolites biosynthesis.

Insights from selected ion flow tube mass spectrometry (SIFT-MS) and chemometrics applied to the quick discrimination of grapevine varieties

Selected Ion Flow Tube Mass Spectrometry (SIFT-MS) is an innovative analytical method based on soft chemical ionization to analyze thecomposition in volatile compounds of a gas phase

Geologic and geomorphologic features applied for identification of wine terroir units by digital image processing, spectroradiometric and GIS techniques in Encruzilhada do Sul, RS, Brazil

Results in the characterization of a new wine terroir unit in south Brazil are reported. Presently, several areas in Brazil are being studied, in an effort to define new wine terroirs and improve the quality of Brazilian wines.

Vine environment interaction as a method for land viticultural evaluation. An experience in Friuli Venezia Giulia (N-E of Italy)

For a long time environment was known as one of the most important factors to characterize the quality of wines but at the same time it appears very difficult to distinguish inside the “terroir” the role of the single factor. These remarks partially explain why methods for viticultural evaluation are often quite different (Amerine et al., 1944; Antoniazzi et al., 1986; Asselin et al., 1987; Astruc et al., 1980; Bonfils, 1977; Boselli, 1991; Colugnati, 1990; Costantinescu, 1967; Costantini et al., 1987; Dutt et al., 1981; Falcetti et al., 1992; Fregoni et al., 1992; Hidalgo, 1980; Intrieri et al., 1988; Laville, 1990; Morlat et al., 1991; Scienza et al., 1990; Shubert et al., 1987; Turri et al., 1991).