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…

EFFECT OF FERMENTATION TEMPERATURE GRADIENT AND SKIN CONTACT ON ESTER AND THIOL PRODUCTION AND TROPICAL FRUIT PERCEPTION IN CHARDONNAY WINES

Wines with tropical fruit aromas have become increasingly more available1,2. With increased availability of different wine styles, it has become important to understand the compounds that cause the fruity aromas in wine. Previous work using micro fermentations showed that fermentation temperature gradients and time on skins resulted in an increase in thiol and ester compounds post fermentation and these compounds are known to cause tropical fruit aroma in wines³. This work aimed to scale up these fermentations/operations to determine if the desired aromas could still be achieved and if there is a perceivable difference in tropical fruit aromas, liking, and emotional response in the wines at the consumer level.

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.

FERMENTATION POTENTIAL OF INDIGENOUS NON-SACCHAROMYCES YEASTS ISOLATED FROM MARAŠTINA GRAPES OF CROATIAN VINEYARDS

The interest in indigenous non-Saccharomyces yeast for use in wine production has increased in recent years because they contribute to the complex character of the wine. The aim of this work was to investigate the fermentation products of ten indigenous strains selected from a collection of native yeasts established at the Institute for Adriatic Crops and Karst Reclamation in 2021, previously isolated from Croatian Maraština grapes, belonging to Hypopichia pseudoburtonii, Metschnikowia pulcherrima, Metschnikowia sinensis, Metschnikowia chrysoperlae, Lachancea thermotolerans, Pichia kluyveri, Hanseniaspora uvarum, Hanseniaspora guillermondii, Hanseniaspora pseudoguillermondii, and Starmerella apicola species, and compare it with commercial non-Saccharomyces and Saccharomyces strains.

HOLISTIC APPROXIMATION OF THE INFLUENCE OF SACCHAROMYCES STRAINS ON WINE AROMA PRECURSORS

Wine varietal aroma is the result of a mixture of compounds formed or liberated from specific grape-aroma precursors. Their liberation/formation from their specific precursors can occur spontaneously by acid catalyzed rearrangements or hydrolysis or by the action of the yeast enzymatic activities. The influence of yeast during fermentation on the production of these volatile compounds has been widely studied however, the effect of this influence during aging is not fully understood. In order to evaluate these processes several indirect strategies have been used to study aroma precursors although they are not useful to understand the chemistry of the process.

EFFECT OF FUMARIC ACID ON SPONTANEOUS FERMENTATION IN GRAPE MUST

Malolactic fermentation (MLF)¹, the decarboxylation of L-malic acid into L-lactic acid, is performed by lactic acid bacteria (LAB). MLF has a deacidifying effect that may compromise freshness or microbiological stability in wines² and can be inhibited by fumaric acid [E297] (FA). In wine, can be added at a maximum allowable dose of 0.6 g/L³. Its inhibition with FA is being studied as an alternative strategy to minimize added doses of SO₂⁴. In addition, wine yeasts are capable of metabolizing and storing small amounts of FA and during alcoholic fermentation (AF).