terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 HOW DO ROOTSTOCKS AFFECT CABERNET SAUVIGNON AROMATIC EXPRESSION?

HOW DO ROOTSTOCKS AFFECT CABERNET SAUVIGNON AROMATIC EXPRESSION?

Abstract

Grape quality potential for wine production is strongly influenced by environmental parameters such as climate and agronomic factors such as rootstock. Several studies underline the effect of rootstock on vegetative growth of the scions [1] and on berry composition [2, 3] with an impact on wine quality. Rootstocks are promising agronomic tools for climate change adaptation and in most grape-growing regions the potential diversity of rootstocks is not fully used and only a few genotypes are planted. Little is known about the effect of rootstock genetic variability on the aromatic composition in wines; thus further investigations are needed.
The purpose of this communication is to highlight how rootstock influences Cabernet Sauvignon red wine aromatic expression.
This study was conducted in 2021 in the GreffAdapt plot (55 rootstocks × 5 scions × 3 blocks) focusing on Vitis vinifera cv. Cabernet Sauvignon and on 20 rootstocks [4]. Grape samples were collected and fermented in triplicate at laboratory scale under standardized conditions; wines were stabilized and stored at the end of alcoholic fermentation.
Sensory analyses were performed to evaluate rootstock impact on aromatic expression. Conventional sensory profiles were carried out following the methodology used by Pelonnier-Magimel et al. (2020) [5], divided into three main steps: descriptor generation, specific training on the generated vocabulary and final evaluation. A panel with similar wine knowledge and previous sensory training was selected for this purpose.
During the first step of sensory evaluation, the tasters generated a defined number of descriptors on a wine selection and following this session 11 terms were chosen based on with panel agreement.
A specific session was carried out before the start of the training in order to validate the general consensus for the proposed references (or descriptors). A control sensory profile was organized after several weeks of training to verify the consensus of the panel.
Sensory analysis data did not allow to highlight a difference in Cabernet Sauvignon red wine aromatic expression for this specific vintage, characterized by excessive rainfall and mean temperatures below the seasonal average. In conclusion, the exploration of other sensory approaches would be interesting to complete this work, as well as a complementary study of other vintages characterized by contrasting climatic conditions compared to 2021.

 

1. Zhang, L., Marguerit, E., Rossdeutsch, L., Ollat, N., & Gambetta, G. A. (2016). The influence of grapevine rootstocks on scion growth and drought resistance. Theoretical and Experimental Plant Physiology, 28, 143-157.
2. Ollat, N., Tandonnet, J. P., Lafontaine, M., & Schultz, H. R. (2001, August). Short and long term effects of three rootstocks on Cabernet Sauvignon vine behaviour and wine quality. In Workshop on Rootstocks Performance in Phylloxera Infested Vineyards 617 (pp. 95-99).
3. Pulko, B., Vršič, S., & Valdhuber, J. (2012). Influence of various rootstocks on the yield and grape composition of Sauvignon Blanc. Czech Journal of Food Sciences, 30(5), 467-473.
4. Marguerit, E.; Lagalle, L.; Lafargue, M.; Tandonnet, J.-P.; Goutouly, J.-P.; Beccavin, I.; Roques, M.; Audeguin, L.; Ollat, N. Gref-fAdapt: A relevant experimental vineyard to speed up the selection of grapevine rootstocks. In Proceedings of the 21th International Giesco meeting, Tessaloniki, Greece, 24–28 June 2019; Koundouras, S., Ed.; pp. 204–208.
5. Pelonnier-Magimel, E., Windhotz, S., Pomarède, I. M., & Barbe, J. C. (2020). Sensory characterisation of wines without added sulfites via specific and adapted sensory profile. Oeno One, 54(4), 671-685.

DOI:

Publication date: February 11, 2024

Issue: OENO Macrowine 2023

Type: Poster

Authors

Laura Farris1,2, Marine Morel3, Julia Gouot1,2,4, Edouard Pelonnier-Magimel1,2, Elisa Marguerit3, Jean-Christophe Barbe1,2

1. Univ. Bordeaux, Bordeaux INP, INRAE, OENO, UMR 1366, ISVV, F-33140 Villenave d’Ornon, France
2. Bordeaux Sciences Agro, Bordeaux INP, INRAE, OENO, UMR 1366, ISVV, F-33170 Gradignan, France
3. EGFV, Univ. Bordeaux, Bordeaux Sciences Agro, INRAE, ISVV, F-33882, Villenave d’Ornon, France
4. R&D Department, JAS Hennessy & Co, Cognac, France

Contact the author*

Keywords

rootstock, Cabernet Sauvignon, sensory analysis, aromatic expression

Tags

IVES Conference Series | oeno macrowine 2023 | oeno-macrowine

Citation

Related articles…

THE FLAVANOL PROFILE OF SKIN, SEED, WINES, AND POMACE ARE CHARACTERISTIC OF EACH TYPOLOGY AND CONTRIBUTES TO UNDERSTAND THE FLAVAN- 3-OLS EXTRACTION DURING RED WINEMAKING

Wine flavanols are extracted from grape skin and seeds along red winemaking. Potentially, eight flavan-3-ol subunits may be present as monomers or as tannins constituents, being these catechin, epicathechin, gallocatechin, epigallocatechin end the gallates of the mentioned units. In this work the flavanol profiles of grape skins and seeds before (grapes) and after (pomace) red winemaking were studied together with the one in the corresponding wines. The trials were made over two vintages in Vitis vinifera cv. Tannat, Syrah and Marselan from Uruguay.

IMPACT OF ABIOTIC AND BIOTIC FACTORS ON BIOADHESION PROPERTIES OF BRETTANOMYCES BRUXELLENSIS

Brettanomyces bruxellensis is an ubiquitous yeast associated with different fermentation media such as beer and kombucha, where its presence is beneficial to bring an aromatic typicity. However, it is a main spoilage yeast in wines, in which it produces volatile phenols responsible for organoleptic deviations causing significant economic losses (Chatonnet et al., 1992). Cellar and winery equipment’s are considered as the first source of contamination, during fermentation and wine ageing process (Connel et al., 2002). Indeed, it is possible to find B. bruxellensis in the air, on walls and floors of the cellars, on small materials, vats and barrels.

MAPPING OF GAS-PHASE CO₂ IN THE HEADSPACE OF CHAMPAGNE GLASSES BY USING AN INFRARED LASER SENSOR UNDER STATIC TASTING CONDITIONS

From the chemical angle, Champagne wines are complex hydro-alcoholic mixtures supersaturated with dissolved carbon dioxide (CO₂). During the pouring process and throughout the several minutes of tasting, the headspace of a champagne glass is progressively invaded by many chemical species, including gas-phase CO₂ in large majority. CO₂ bubbles nucleated in the glass and collapsing at the champagne surface act indeed as a continuous paternoster lift for aromas throughout champagne or sparkling wine tasting [1]. Nevertheless, inhaling a gas space with a concentration of gaseous CO₂ close to 30% and higher triggers a very unpleasant tingling sensation, the so-called “carbonic bite”, which might completely perturb the perception of the wine’s bouquet.

PHENOTYPIC DIVERSITY AND BIO-PROTECTION CAPABILITY OF METSCHNIKOWIA SP. IN OENOLOGY

Nowadays, the trend is to reduce the use of chemical inputs in the food sector, including in oenology. One of the inputs widely used in the wine making process are sulfites, for its several properties: antimicrobial and antioxidiant. This use isn’t without consequences on consumer’s health and environment, it can lead for example to allergic reactions and pollution. To limit the addition of chemical inputs, microbial alternatives are used. It consists to inoculate in grape must, a micro-organism able to inhibit the growth of the negative indigenous flora during the phase before the fermentation and to guarantee the sensory qualities of wines.

EFFECT OF OXIDATION ON LOW MOLECULAR WEIGHT PHENOLIC FRACTION, SALIVARY PROTEINS PRECIPITATION AND ASTRINGENCY SUBQUALITIES OF RED WINES

Changes in the low molecular weight phenolic fraction, obtained by liquid-liquid microextraction technique, were studied after controlled oxidation of two typologies of Sangiovese wines (Brunello di Montalcino and Chianti Classico) belonging to two vintages (2017 and 2018). The fractions were characterized by LC-MS and quantified by HPLC. The most abundant extracted compounds were the phenolic acids. The effect of oxidation, vintage, and wine typology was stated by a three-ways ANOVA. Gallic and syringic acids significantly increased after oxidation while (–)-epicatechin decreased the most.