terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 HAZE RISK ASSESSMENT OF MUSCAT MUSTS AND WINES : WHICH LABORATORY TEST ALLOWS A RELIABLE ESTIMATION OF THE HEATWAVE REALITY?

HAZE RISK ASSESSMENT OF MUSCAT MUSTS AND WINES : WHICH LABORATORY TEST ALLOWS A RELIABLE ESTIMATION OF THE HEATWAVE REALITY?

Abstract

Wines made from Muscat d’Alexandria grapes exhibit a high haze risk. For this reason, they are systematically treated with bentonite, on the must and sometimes also on wine. In most oenological laboratories and in companies (trade, cooperatives, independent winegrowers), the test that is by far the most widely used, on a worldwide scale, remains the heat test at 80°C for 30 minutes to 2 hours (and some-times up to 6 hours). The tannin test (sometimes coupled with a heat treatment) and the Bentotest are still used. In this study, we show that all these tests give much higher estimates of the haze risk than the risk assessed by a 24-48h treatment at 42°C, which represents a heat wave. For this purpose, we performed heat treatments ranging from 40 to 80°C in order to find out which test best reflects a heat wave episode. Each of these tests was carried out at different heating times (kinetic approach) and with wines presenting risks of protein breakage ranging from low to high. The results show that : 1) the test at 50°C for 1h (in a water bath) is by far the most correlated with the haze appearing when the wine is spent 24-48h at 42°C and 2) this test has a safety margin to choose the most adapted protein stabilisation treatment. Conversely, treatment at 80°C gives very high turbidities. The direct consequence of the 80°C-heat test is the use of too high doses of bentonite to eliminate a risk that is in fact poorly assessed. In this study dedicated to Muscat from Spain (Catalunya) wines, we show that it is possible, by means of a 1-hour heat test at 50°C carried out in the laboratory, to decide on the most appropriate treatment. In concrete terms, this translates into the reduction of bentonite doses, but also into the possibility of using oenological alternatives to this treatment.

DOI:

Publication date: February 9, 2024

Issue: OENO Macrowine 2023

Type: Poster

Authors

Richard Marchal¹, Pol Gimenez², Bertrand Robillard³, Fernando Zamora², Jacques-Emmanuel Barbier³, Thomas Sa-Lomon¹, Maria Isabel Araque Granados², Joan-Miquel Canals Bosch²

1. Faculté des Sciences de l’université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Laboratoire d’Oenologie, 51687 Reims CEDEX 02, France
2. Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Facultat d’Enologia, Campus Sescelades, 43007 Tarragona, Espagne
3. Institut Œnologique de Champagne – ZI de Mardeuil – 51201 ÉPERNAY Cedex, France

Contact the author*

Keywords

Haze risk, Muscat, wine, heat test

Tags

IVES Conference Series | oeno macrowine 2023 | oeno-macrowine

Citation

Related articles…

VOLATILE COMPOSITION OF WINES USING A GC/TOFMS: HS-SPME VS MICRO LLE AS SAMPLE PREPARATION METHODOLOGY

Wine aroma analysis can be done by sensorial or instrumental analysis, the latter involving several me-thodologies based on olfactometric detection, electronic noses or gas chromatography. Gas Chromatography 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.

VOLATILE AND GLYCOSYLATED MARKERS OF SMOKE IMPACT: LEVELS AND PATTERNS OBSERVED IN 2020 WINES FROM THE UNITED STATES WEST COAST

Smoke impact in wines is caused by a wide range of volatile phenols found in wildfire smoke. These compounds are absorbed and accumulate in berries, where they may also become glycosylated. Both volatile and glycosylated forms eventually end up in wine where they can cause off-flavors, described as “smoky”, “bacon”, “campfire” and “ashtray”, often long-lasting and lingering on the palate. In cases of large wildfire events, economic losses for all wine industry actors can be devastating.

SENSORY IMPROVEMENT OF DEALCOHOLISED WINES

Interest and willing-ness to buy alcohol-free wines by customers is increasing for several years [1]. Due to the rising relevance of dealcoholised wines it is the objective of this study to contribute to a better understanding of the flavor variation among dealcoholised wines and to explore enological measures, how to improve final quality.
First a range of commercial, alcoholfree white wines were analysed by the holistic sensory method projective mapping, including a question for hedonic acceptance. Based on the combination of a non-target-HS-SPME-GC/MS analysis with sensory analysis we obtained a clustering of the wines into three groups.

CONSENSUS AND SENSORY DOMINANCE ARE DEPENDENT ON QUALITY CONCEPT DEFINITIONS

The definition of the term “quality” in sensory evaluation of food products does not seem to be consensual. Descriptive or liking methods are generally used to differentiate between wines (Lawless et al., 1997). Nevertheless, quality evaluation of a product such as wine can also relate to emotional aspects. As exposed by Costell (2002), product quality is defined as an integrated impression, like acceptability, pleasure, or emotional experiences during tasting. According to the ‘modality appropriateness’ hypothesis which predicts that wine tasters weigh the most suitable sensory inputs for a specific assess- ment (Freides, 1974; Welch & Warren, 1980), the nature of the quality definitions may modulate sensory influences.

EFFECT OF WHOLE BUNCH VINIFICATION ON THE ABUNDANCE OF A SWEETENING COMPOUND

In classic red wine-making process, grapes are usually destemmed between harvest and the filling of the vat. However, some winemakers choose to let all or a part of the stems in contact with the juice during vatting, this is called whole bunch vinification. For instance, this practice is traditionally used in some French wine regions, notably in Burgundy, Beaujolais and the Rhone Valley. The choice to keep this part of the grape is likely to affect the sensory properties of wine, as its gustatory perception1,2.