Bentonite fining in cold wines: prediction tests, reduced efficiency and possibilities to avoid additional fining treatments

All along the winemaking process, conditioning and aging, wine is susceptible to be contaminated by different molecules. Contaminations can have various origins, related to wine microorganisms or as a result of an exogenous contamination. The aforementioned contamination of the wine can be caused by the migration of molecules from the materials in contact with the wine or by a contamination from exogenous molecules present in the air. Regardless of the source of the contamination, mainly two types of consequences can be observed.

Despite the extensive research performed during the last decades, the multifactorial mechanism responsible for the white wine protein haze formation is not fully characterized. Herein, a new model is proposed, which is based on the experimental identification of sulfur dioxide as a major modulating factor inducing wine protein haze upon heating. As opposed to other reducing agents, such as 2-mercaptoethanol, dithiothreitol and tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine hydrochloride (TCEP), the addition of SO2 to must/wine upon heating cleaves intraprotein disulfide bonds, hinders thiol-disulfide exchange during protein interactions and can lead to the formation of novel inter/intraprotein disulfide bonds. Those are eventually responsible for wine protein aggregation which follows a nucleation-growth kinetic model as shown by dynamic light scattering [1].

Not only vintner’s decisions in the vineyard, but also winemaker’s choices of technology approaches in the cellar play a significant role in the final wine style and quality. Whereas traditional technologies within chosen terroir are quite well explored and thus somehow predictable, there is no proper knowledge available on possible outcomes in case of implementing novel, alternative winemaking strategies. To reveal their effects on wine aroma compounds and sensory characteristics, two alternative strategies
(cryoextraction or addition of whole grape berries during last stages of fermentation) were compared to classical Vipava valley winemaking approach as normally used for an autochthonous variety Zelen. After separate vinification and bottling, all the experimental wines were subjected to semiquantitative metabolic profiling of volatile compounds (VOCs) by means of GC/MS and were then also sensorialy evaluated by pre-trained panel.

Glutathione is a tripeptide (γ-Glu-Cys-Gly), which can occur in grapes, in must and in wine prevalently in the reduced form as well as in the oxidized form as glutathione disulfide. The importance of the reduced form of glutathione lies in its antioxidant activity. In must, it limits browning by reducing o-quinones produced by polyphenol oxidase activity on hydroxycinnamic acids; in wine, it exerts a protective effect on various aromatic compounds. Glutathione concentration in wine is lower than in grape juice and variable as it depends on several factors, ranging from the native content of grapes to winemaking technique.

1,1,6-trimethyl-1,2-dihydronaphtelene (TDN) evokes the odor of “petrol” in wine, especially in the variety Riesling. Increasing UV-radiation due to climate change intensifies formation of carotenoids in the berry skins and an increase of TDN-precursors1. Exploring new viticultural and oenological strategies to limit TDN formation in the future requires precise knowledge of TDN thresholds in different matrices. Thresholds reported in the literature vary substantially between 2 µg/L up to 20 µg/L2,3,4 due to the use of different methods. As Riesling grapes are used for very different wine styles such as dry, sweet or sparkling wines, it is essential to study the impact of varying ethanol and carbonation levels.