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…

IMPACT OF HARVEST DATE ON THE FINE MOLECULAR COMPOSITION OF MUST AND BORDEAUX RED WINE (VAR. MERLOT, CABERNET SAUVIGNON). FOCUS ON ACIDITY AND SENSORY IMPACT AFTER FIVE YEARS OF AGING

Climate change has brought several impacts that are becoming increasingly intense during the last few years and put at risk the quality of the berries or even the plant’s sustainability. Such extreme climatic events impact the composition of the wine while modulating its quality and the consumer preferences (Tempère et al., 2019). The three most important changes that take place in the must are: 1) decrease acidity, 2) increase of the concentration of sugar, hence increase of alcohol in the wine, and 3) modification
of the sensory balance and the development for example of cooked fruit aromas.

MOVING FROM SULFITES TO BIOPROTECTION: WHICH IMPACT ON CHARDONNAY WINE?

Over the last few years, several tools have been developed to reduce the quantity of sulfites used during winemaking, including bioprotection. Although its effectiveness in preventing the development of spoilage microorganisms has been proven, few data are available on the impact of sulfite substitution by bioprotection on the final product. The objective of this study was therefore to characterize Chardonnay wines with the addition of sulfite or bioprotection in the pre-fermentation stage. The effects of both treatments on resulting matrices was evaluated at several scales: analysis of classical oenological parameters, antioxidant capacity, phenolic compounds, non-volatile metabolome and sensory profile.

OTA DEGRADATION BY BACTERIAL LACCASEST

Laccases from lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are described as multicopper oxidase enzymes with copper union sites. Among their applications, phenolic compounds’ oxidation and biogenic amines’ degradation, have been described. Besides, the role of LAB in the toxicity reduction of ochratoxin A (OTA) has been reported (Fuchs et al., 2008; Luz et al., 2018). Fungal laccases, but not bacterial laccases, have been screened for OTA and mycotoxins’ degradation (Loi et al., 2018). OTA is a mycotoxin produced by some fungal species, such as Penicillium and Aspergillus sp., which infect grape bunches used for winemaking.

EFFECT OF DIFFERENT TEMPERATURE AND WATER-LOSS DEHYDRATION CONDITIONS ON THE PATTERN OF FREE AND GLYCOSYLATED VOLATILE METABOLITES OF ITALIAN RED GRAPES

Post-harvest grape berries dehydration/withering are worldwide applied to produce high-quality sweet and dry wines (e.i., Vin Santo, Tokaji, Amarone della Valpolicella). Temperature and water loss impact grape metabolism [1] and are key variables in modulating the production of grape compounds of oenological interest, such as Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), secondary metabolites responsible for the aroma of the final wine.
The aim of this research was to assess the impact of post-harvest dehydration on free and glycosylated VOCs of two Italian red wine grapes, namely Nebbiolo and Aleatico, dehydrated in tunnel under controlled condition (varied temperature and weight-loss, at constant humidity and air flow). From these grapes Sforzato di Valtellina Passito DOCG and Elba Aleatico Passito DOCG, respectively.

MONOSACCHARIDE COMPOSITION AND POLYSACCHARIDE FAMILIES OF LYOPHILISED EXTRACTS OBTAINED FROM POMACES OF DIFFERENT WHITE GRAPE VARIETIES

The recovery of bioactive compounds from grape and wine by-products is currently an important and necessary objective for sustainability. Grape pomace is one of the main by-products and is a rich source of some bioactive compounds such as polyphenols, polysaccharides, fatty acids, minerals and seed oil. Polysaccharides contained in the grape cell wall can be rhamnogalacturonans type II (RG-II), polysaccharides rich in arabinose and galactose (PRAG), mannoproteins (MP), homogalacturonans (HG) and non pectic polysaccharides (NPP).