terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 IMPACT OF ACIDIFICATION AT BOTTLING BY FUMARIC ACID ON RED WINE AFTER 2 YEARS

IMPACT OF ACIDIFICATION AT BOTTLING BY FUMARIC ACID ON RED WINE AFTER 2 YEARS

Abstract

Global warming is responsible for a lack of organic acid in grape berries, leading to wines with higher pH and lower titrable acidity. The chemical, microbiological and organoleptic equilibriums are impacted by this change of organic acid concentration. It is common practice to acidify the wine in order to prevent these imbalances that can lead to wine defects and early spoilage. Tartaric acid (TA) is most commonly used by winemaker for wine acidification purposes. Fumaric acid (FA), which is authorized by the OIV in its member states for the inhibition of malolactic fermentation, could also be used as a potential acidification candidate since it has a better acidifying power than tartaric acid. Thus, the objective of the present study is to investigate the impact of the addition of FA at bottling in comparison to TA on white and red wine’s quality.

For this purpose, Cabernet Sauvignon wine was first split into two tanks, one of which was sulfited at 80 mg/L. The two batches, sulfite-free and sulfited, were then redivided into three batches, one control without any addition, one with TA addition at 2,5 g/L and one with FA addition at 2 g/L. The wine was then bottled and the following analysis were performed after 24 months. Classical oenological parameters (pH, titratable acidity), color parameters (color intensity, CIELAB), total phenolic compounds (IPT, Folin), as well as antioxidant capacities (CUPRAC, DPPH), total tannins, total anthocyanins and their composition (HPLC analysis) were also analyzed. Sensory analyses were also performed on the wines in order to assess the organoleptic impact of FA addition.

DOI:

Publication date: February 9, 2024

Issue: OENO Macrowine 2023

Type: Poster

Authors

Claire Payan1, 2, Anne-Laure Gancel¹, Monika Christmann²
1. Unité de recherche Œnologie, EA 4577, USC 1366 INRA, ISVV, Université de Bordeaux, F33882 Villenave d’Ornon, France
2. Hochschule Geisenheim University von Lade Straße, 65366 Geisenheim, Germany

Contact the author*

Keywords

Wine acidification, Fumaric Acid, Red wine, Oenological parameters

Tags

IVES Conference Series | oeno macrowine 2023 | oeno-macrowine

Citation

Related articles…

WHAT’S FUTURE FOR SANTORINI’S VITICULTURE IN THE CONTEXT OF CLIMATE CHANGE

The own-rooted vineyard of Santorini is a unique case of vineyard worldwide that is been cultivated for thousands of years. On the island’s volcanic soil, the vines are still cultivated with traditional techniques, which are adapted to the specific and extreme weather conditions that prevail on it. While climate change is a reality in the Mediterranean region, will Santorini vineyard endure its impact? The study of the traditional training systems, techniques and vine density, as well as the application of sustainable solutions (cover crops and use of kaolin etc.) revealed sustainable methods for the adaptation of the local viticulture to new climatic phenomena that tend to be more and more frequent in the region due to climate change.

Microbial ecosystems in wineries – molecular interactions between species and modelling of population dynamics

Microbial ecosystems are primary drivers of viticultural, oenological and other cellar-related processes
such as wastewater treatment. Metagenomic datasets have broadly mapped the vast microbial species
diversity of many of the relevant ecological niches within the broader wine environment, from vineyard
soils to plants and grapes to fermentation. The data highlight that species identities and diversity
significantly impact agronomic performance of vineyards as well as wine quality, but the complexity
of these systems and of microbial growth dynamics has defeated attempts to offer actionable
tools to guide or predict specific outcomes of ecosystem-based interventions.

PHOTOCHEMICAL DEGRADATION OF TRYPTOPHAN IN MODEL WINE: IMPACT OF HEAVY METALS AND OXYGEN ON 2-AMINOACETOPHENONE FORMATION

The wine industry worldwide faces more and more challenges due to climate change, such as increased dryness in some areas, water stress, sunburn and early harvesting during hot summer temperatures¹. One of the resulting problems for the wine quality might be a higher prevalence of the untypical aging off-flavor (ATA)². A substance, which Rapp and Versini made responsible for ATA, is the 2-aminoace-tophenone (2-AAP)³. 2-AAP in wine causes a naphthalene, wet towels, wet wool, acacia flower or just a soapy note⁴.

Grouping Vitis vinifera grapevine varieties based on their aromatic composition

Climate change is likely to impact wine typicity across the globe, raising concerns in wine regions historically renowned for the quality of their terroir1. Amongst several changes in viticultural practices, replacing some of the planting material (i.e. clones, rootstocks and cultivars) is thought to be one of the most promising potential levers to be used for adapting to climate change. But the change of cultivars also involves the issue of protecting the region’s wine typicity. In Bordeaux (France), extensive research has been conducted on identifying meridional varieties that could be good candidates to help guard against the effects of climate change2 while less research has been done concerning their impacts on Bordeaux wine typicity.

ACIDIC AND DEMALIC SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE STRAINS FOR MANAGING PROBLEMS OF ACIDITY DURING THE ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATION

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.