FLAVANOL COMPOSITION OF VARIETAL AND BLEND WINES MADE BEFORE AND AFTER FERMENTATION FROM SYRAH, MARSELAN AND TANNAT

Since the use of sodium arsenite was banned in 2001, Grapevine Trunk Diseases (GTDs) have become even more widespread increasing (1).To avoid pathogen entry, pruning, an age-old practice, is increa- singly coming to the fore. As the vine is a liana (2), any excessive woody proliferation has to be stopped. This can preserve grapevine life, provided it does not damage the diaphragm.

4-Ethylphenol (EP) in wine is associated with organoleptic defects such as barn and horse sweat odors. The origin of EP is the bioconversion reaction of p-coumaric acid (CA), naturally present in grapes and grape musts by contaminating yeasts of the genus Brettanomyces bruxellensis.
Yeast cell walls (YCW) have shown adsorption capacities for different compounds. They could be applied to wines in order to adsorb either CA and/or EP and thus reduce the organoleptic defects caused by the contaminating yeasts.

Botrytis cinerea Pers., the causal agent of grey mould disease, is responsible for substantial economic losses, as it causes reduction of grape and wine quality and quantity. Exploitation of antagonistic yeasts is a promising strategy for controlling grey mould incidence and limiting the usage of synthetic fungicides. In our previous studies, 119 different indigenous yeasts were screened for putative multidimensional modes of action against filamentous fungus B. cinerea [1]. The most promissing biocontrol yeast was Pichia guilliermondii ZIM624, which exhibited several anatagonistic traits (production of cell wall degrading enzymes, chitinase and β-1,3-glucanase; demonstration of in vitro inhibitory effect on B. cinerea mycelia radial growth; production of antifungal volatiles, assimilation of a broad diversity of carbon sources, contributing to its competitivnes in inhabiting grapes in nature).

In a recent study several genes controlling the acidification properties of the wine yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae have been identified by a QTL approach [1]. Many of these genes showed allelic variations that affect the metabolism of malic acid and the pH homeostasis during the alcoholic fermentation. Such alleles have been used for driving genetic selection of new S. cerevisiae starters that may conversely acidify or deacidify the wine by producing or consuming large amount of malic acid [2]. This particular feature drastically modulates the final pH of wine with difference of 0.5 units between the two groups.

A wide range of olfactory descriptors ranging from fresh and jammy fruit notes to cooked and oxidized fruit notes could describe the fruity aroma of red wines [1]. The fruity character of a wine is mainly related to the grape variety selected, to the terroir and the vinification process applied for its conception. In white wines, some volatile compounds confer directly their aroma to the wine while the question of “key” compound is more complex in red wines. According to many studies performed over the past decades, some fruity ethyl esters are directly involved in the fruity perception of red wines while others, present at subthreshold concentrations, participate indirectly to the fruity expression via perceptive interactions [2].