GiESCO 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 GiESCO 9 GiESCO 2019 9 Climate change 9 Evaluation of vineyards, fruit and wine affected by wild fire smoke

Evaluation of vineyards, fruit and wine affected by wild fire smoke

Abstract

Context and purpose of study ‐ Wineries may randomly reject fruit from vineyards near wild fires exposed to smoke. It is difficult to determine if fruit has been compromised in quality when exposed to smoke, and whether or not smoke taint flavors will result when fruit is fermented into wine. Phenolic smoke compounds bind with sugars in the fruit with enzymes (glycosyltransferases) and are then hydrolyzed during maturation, wine making and even in a taster’s mouth. Testing the fruit for volatile phenols and glycosides is both expensive and not completely predictive as standards are not well defined for damage based on smoke chemical content. Micro‐vinification even with partially ripened fruit is an inexpensive and fairly accurate method to quickly determine if fruit has a potential smoke taint problem. Wines can then be tasted for the presence of off flavors. Developing standards based on volatile phenolic and glycocide concentrations to predict whether fruit is affected by smoke and how wine will taste when vinified would be very helpful for accepting or rejecting fruit from affected areas.

Materials and methods ‐ Following wild fire smoke exposure, fruit was sampled and micro‐vinified during veraison and again 2 weeks before harvest from 13 Cabernet sauvignon vineyards in a transect 25 km across Lake County, California. A control vineyard unexposed to wildfire smoke was sampled outside of the area. Sub samples from each vineyard were analyzed immediately for guaiacol and 4‐methyl guaiacol. 19 liter wine lots were then microvinified, stabilized and bottled for each vineyard for both sampling dates. The wine was analyzed for volatile phenols and glycoside compounds (guaiacol and 4‐methyl guaiacol, methyl cresol, 4‐methyl syringol, o‐cresol, p‐cresol, syringol, syringol gentiobioside, methyl syringol gentiobioside, phenol rutinoside, cresol rutinoside, guiaocol rutinoside and methyl guaiacol rutinoside). A 14 member tasting panel evaluated the wines for smoke flavors. Panel members were able to detect off flavors in both sample sets, and tainted wines were highly correlated with elevated concentrations of volatile phenols and glycosides. GIS data of vineyard proximity to the fire, elevation, temperature and wind direction and speed were used to conduct multivariate analysis of factors affecting wine smoke compound chemicals and flavor impacts on wine.

Results ‐ Not all wines were affected; in this study, 6µ/l guaiacol was the threshold of detection for off flavors in wine by most tasters. Off flavors were much stronger in the wines made from riper fruit, as were the concentration of smoke compounds, by as much as six fold compared to unfermented fruit. Wind direction and speed, proximity to active fires, and temperature are the factors that are most highly correlated to smoke damage to fruit near wildfires. The control wine sample had no off flavors and no volatile phenols were detected. By contrast, some sites close to the edge of fires and immediately downwind were very heavily affected, and contained high levels of smoke taint compounds. This study will help to better understand when vineyards are most at risk to wild fire smoke damage, and how micro‐vinification may be a reliable and quick way to predict fermentation outcomes before harvest in vineyards affected by wildfire smoke.

DOI:

Publication date: June 19, 2020

Issue: GiESCO 2019

Type: Article

Authors

Glenn MCGOURTY (1), Michael I. JONES (1), Anita OBERHOLSTER (2), Ryan KEIFFER (1)

(1) University of California Cooperative Extension Mendocino County, 890 North Bush Street, Ukiah, Ca. 95482
(2) University of California Davis Department of Viticulture and Enology, Davis,California, 95616

Contact the author

Keywords

Wild fire smoke, smoke taint in wine, volatile phenols, glycocides , guaiacol, 4‐methyl guaiacol

Tags

GiESCO 2019 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Deconstructing the soil component of terroir: from controversy to consensus

Wine terroir describes the collectively recognized relation between a geographical area and the distinctive organoleptic characteristics of the wines produced in it. The overriding objective in terroir studies is therefore to provide scientific proof relating the properties of terroir components to wine quality and typicity. In scientific circles, the role of climate (macro-, meso- and micro-) on grape and wine characteristics is well documented and accepted as the most critical. Moreover, there has been increasing interest in recent years about new elements with possible importance in shaping wine terroir like berry/leaf/soil microbiology or even aromatic plants in proximity to the vineyard conferring flavors to the grapes. However, the actual effect of these factors is also dependent on complex interactions with plant material (variety/clone, rootstock, vine age) and with human factors.
The contribution of soil, although a fundamental component of terroir and extremely popular among wine enthusiasts, remains a much-debated issue among researchers. The role of geology is probably the one mostly associated by consumers with the notion of terroir with different parent rocks considered to give birth to different wine styles. However, the relationship between wine properties and the underlying parent material raises a lot of controversy especially regarding the actual existence of rock-derived flavors in the wine (e.g. minerality). As far as the actual soil properties are concerned, the effect of soil physical properties is generally regarded as the most significant (e.g sandy soils being associated with lighter wines while those on clay with colored and tannic ones) mostly through control of water availability which ultimately modifies berry ripening conditions either directly by triggering biosynthetic pathways, or indirectly by altering vigor and yield components. The role of soil chemistry seems to be weakly associated to wine sensory characteristic, although N, K, S and Ca, but also soil pH, are often considered important in the overall soil effect.
Recently, in the light of evidence provided by precision agriculture studies reporting a high variability of vineyard soils, the spatial scale should also be taken into consideration in the evaluation of the soil effects on wines. While it is accepted that soil effects become more significant than climate on a local level, it is not clear whether these micro-variations of vineyard soils are determining in the terroir effect. Moreover, as terroir is not a set of only natural factors, the magnitude of the contribution of human-related factors (irrigation, fertilization, soil management) to the soil effect still remains ambiguous. Lastly, a major shortcoming of the majority of works about soil effects on wine characteristics is the absence of connection with actual vine physiological processes since all soil effects on grape and wine chemistry and sensorial properties are ultimately mediated through vine responses.
This article attempts to breakdown the main soil attributes involved in the terroir effect to suggest an improved understanding about soil’s true contribution to wine sensory characteristics. It is proposed that soil parameters per se are not as significant determining factors in the terroir effect but rather their mutual interactions as well as with other natural and human factors included in the terroir concept. Consequently, similarly to bioclimatic indices, composite soil indices (i.e. soil depth, water holding capacity, fertility, temperature etc), incorporating multiple soil parameters, might provide a more accurate and quantifiable means to assess the relative weight of the soil component in the terroir effect.

Climate, Viticulture, and Wine … my how things have changed!

The planet is warmer than at any time in our recorded past and increasing greenhouse emissions and persistence in the climate system means that continued warming is highly likely. Climate change has already altered the basic framework of growing grapes for wine production worldwide and will likely continue to do so for years to come. The wine sector can continue to play an important role in leading the agricultural sector in addressing climate change. From developing on…

Frost risk projections in a changing climate are highly sensitive in time and space to frost modelling approaches

Late spring frost is a major challenge for various winegrowing regions across the world, its occurrence often leading to important yield losses and/or plant failure. Despite a significant increase in minimum temperatures worldwide, the spatial and temporal evolution of spring frost risk under a warmer climate remains largely uncertain. Recent projections of spring frost risk for viticulture in Europe throughout the 21st century show that its evolution strongly depends on the model approach used to simulate budburst. Furthermore, the frost damage modelling methods used in these projections are usually not assessed through comparison to field observations and/or frost damage reports.
The present study aims at comparing frost risk projections simulated using six spring frost models based on two approaches: a) models considering a fixed damage threshold after the predicted budburst date (e.g BRIN, Smoothed-Utah, Growing Degree Days, Fenovitis) and b) models considering a dynamic frost sensitivity threshold based on the predicted grapevine winter/spring dehardening process (e.g. Ferguson model). The capability of each model to simulate an actual frost event for the Vitis vinifera cv. Chadonnay B was previously assessed by comparing simulated cold thermal stress to reports of events with frost damage in Chablis, the northernmost winegrowing region of Burgundy. Models exhibited scores of κ > 0.65 when reproducing the frost/non-frost damage years and an accuracy ranging from 0.82 to 0.90.
Spring frost risk projections throughout the 21st century were performed for all winegrowing subregions of Bourgogne-Franche-Comté under two CMIP5 concentration pathways (4.5 and 8.5) using statistically downscaled 8×8 km daily air temperature and humidity of 13 climate models. Contrasting results with region-specific spring frost risk trends were observed. Three out of five models show a decrease in the frequency of frost years across the whole study area while the other two show an increase that is more or less pronounced depending on winegrowing subregion. Our findings indicate that the lack of accuracy in grapevine budburst and dehardening models makes climate projections of spring frost risk highly uncertain for grapevine cultivation regions.

Local ancient grapevine cultivars to face future viticulture

Among the different strategies to cope with the negative impacts of climate change on viticulture, the exploitation of genetic diversity is one of the most promising to adapt to new conditions and maintain wine production and quality. One of the biggest concerns in the context of climate change is to improve water use efficiency (WUE). In this way, the use of genotypes that present a better response to drought and high WUE is a key issue. In this work, physiological performance analysis was conducted to compare the water deficit stress (WDS) responses of local and widespread grapevines cultivars. Leaf gas exchange, water use efficiency (WUE) at different levels (leaf and long-term WUE (∆13C)), leaf osmotic adjustment and other water relations parameters were determined in plants under well-watered and WDS conditions alongside assessment of the levels of foliar hormones concentrations. Results denote that local cultivars displayed better physiological performance under WDS as compared to the widely-distributed ones. he results corroborate the hypothesis that better stomatal control allows increasing leaf WUE under drought as occurred in the local Callet cv.; but the minority local cultivar Escursac cv. showed high WUE under both treatments. In this case, high WUE can be related to maintaining higher photosynthetic activity under drought. The different mechanisms underlying the better performance under WDS and high WUE of minority local cultivars are discussed.

Impact of yeast derivatives to increase the phenolic maturity and aroma intensity of wine

Using viticultural and enological techniques to increase aromatics in white wine is a prized yet challenging technique for commercial wine producers. Equally difficult are challenges encountered in hastening phenolic maturity and thereby increasing color intensity in red wines. The ability to alter organoleptic and visual properties of wines plays a decisive role in vintages in which grapes are not able to reach full maturity, which is seen increasingly more often as a result of climate change. A new, yeast-based product on the viticultural market may give the opportunity to increase sensory properties of finished wines. Manufacturer packaging claims these yeast derivatives intensify wine aromas of white grape varieties, as well as improve phenolic ripeness of red varieties, but the effects of this application have been little researched until now. The current study applied the yeast derivative, according to the manufacture’s instructions, to the leaves of both neutral and aromatic white wine varieties, as well as on structured red wine varieties. Chemical parameters and volatile aromatics were analyzed in grape musts and finished wines, and all wines were subjected to sensory analysis by a tasting panel. Collective results of all analyses showed that the application of the yeast derivative in the vineyard showed no effect across all varieties examined, and did not intensify white wine aromatics, nor improve phenolic ripeness and color intensity in red wine.