Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Bentonite fining in cold wines: prediction tests, reduced efficiency and possibilities to avoid additional fining treatments

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

Abstract

Bentonite fining is widely used to prevent protein haze in white wines. Most wineries use laboratory-scale fining trials to define the appropriate amount of bentonite to be used in the cellar. Those pre-tests need to mimic as much as possible the industrial scale fining procedure to determine the exact amount of bentonite necessary for protein stability. Nevertheless it is frequent that, after fining with the recommended amount of bentonite, wines appear still unstable and need an additional fining treatment. It remains a major challenge to understand why the same wine, fined with the same dosage of the same bentonite, achieves stability in the lab, but not in the cellar. Presently unclear is the role, wine temperature plays in this issue. The impact of wine temperature, pH and mixing, on the fining efficiency of different bentonites has been studied in a Gewürztraminer wine. Three different types of bentonites were used in this trial; a sodium-bentonite, a sodium-calcium-bentonite and a sodium-calcium-bentonite which additionally contains tannins. This paper shows the effects of low wine temperatures on the efficiency of three different commercial bentonites. Further, the effect of an additional whirling up of the settled bentonite is studied to understand if this could be a measure to increase the effectiveness of the fining treatment. Wine temperature has an impact on the performance of the bentonite fining. Low temperatures make it more difficult to achieve protein stability for all the different bentonites in investigation. Not one single wine achieved protein stability when it was fined at 4°C with any of the three bentonites in investigation. At low wine temperature always an additional fining treatment or anew shaking of the wines was necessary to achieve protein stability. Especially the sodium-bentonite Bentogran showed an important loss in efficiency when wines were cold. NaCalit and Super Black Jell were less affected from low wine temperatures and achieved tolerable turbidity levels when bentonite was stirred up again after one week of contact. Mixing up the settled bentonite once again when settled is an efficient way to improve the effectiveness of the bentonite fining. This simple and easy to carry out measure can be an interesting strategy for the praxis to avoid additional fining treatments. Further, to reduce the discrepancy among the laboratory and cellar conditions, two possibilities exist: (a) fining trials could be conducted at the same temperature as the wine in the cellar has, (b) bentonite fining in the cellar should not occur at too low wine temperatures. These are relevant findings for winemakers who do their bentonite fining in cold wines and deal with varieties with a high wine pH.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

Konrad Pixner*, Andreas Putti, Norbert Kofler

*Laimburg

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Field-grown Sauvignon Blanc berries react to increased exposure by controlling antioxidant homeostasis and displaying UV acclimation responses that are influenced by the level of ambient light

Leaf removal in the bunch zone is a common viticultural practice with several objectives, yet it has been difficult to conclusively link the physiological mechanism(s) and metabolic berry impact to this widely practiced treatment. We used a field-omics approach1 in a Sauvignon blanc high altitude model vineyard, showing that the early leaf removal in the bunch zone caused quantifiable and stable responses (over years) in the microclimate where the main perturbation was increased exposure. We provide an explanation for how leaf removal leads to the shifts in grape metabolites typically linked to this treatment and confirm anecdotal evidence and previous reports that leaf removal treatment at an early stage of berry development affects “quality-associated” metabolites (monoterpenes and norisoprenoids).

Towards multi-purpose valorisation of polyphenols from grape pomace: Pressurized liquid extraction coupled to purification by membrane processes

Grape by-products (including skins, seeds, stems and vine shoots) are rich in health promoting polyphenols. Their extraction from winery waste and their following purification are of special interest to produce extracts with high added value compounds. Meanwhile, the growing concern over environmental problems associated with economic constraints, require the development of environmentally sustainable extraction technologies. The extraction using semi-continuous subcritical water, as a natural solvent at high temperature and high pressure a technology is promising “green” technology that is environmentally friendly, energy efficient and improve the extraction process in plant tissues.

A combination of biotechnology tools and coopers elements for an alternative the addition of SO2 at the end of the malolactic fermentation in red wines or at the “mutage” for the “liquoreux” wines

In red wines the post-MLF SO2 addition is an essential event. It is also the case for the “mutage” during the elaboration of the “liquoreux”. At these moments SO2 plays an antimicrobial action and an antioxidant effect. But at current pH of wines, ensuring a powerful molecular SO2 has become very difficult. Recent work on Brettanomyces strains have also shown that some strains are resistant up to 1.2 mg / L of molecular SO2. It’s also the case of the some Saccharomuces or Zygosaccharomyces strains suitable to re-ferment “liquoreux” wines after the “mutage”.

Fining-Derived Allergens in Wine: from Detection to Quantification

Since 2012, EU Commission approved compulsory labeling of wines treated with allergenic additives or processing aids “if their presence can be detected in the final product” (EU Commission Implementing Regulation No. 579/2012 of 29 June 2012). The list of potential allergens to be indicated on wine labels comprises sulphur dioxide and milk- and egg- derived fining agents, including hen egg lysozyme, which is usually added in wines as preservative. In some non-EU countries, the list includes gluten, tree nuts and fish gelatins. With the exception of lysozyme, all these fining proteins were long thought to be totally removed by subsequent winemaking processings (e.g. bentonite addition).

Identification of caffeic acid as a major component of Moscatel wine protein sediment

Proteins play a significant role in the colloidal stability and clarity of white wines [1]. However, under conditions of high temperatures during storage or transportation, the proteins themselves can self-aggregate into light-dispersing particles causing the so-called protein haze [2]. Formation of these unattractive precipitates in bottled wine is a common defect of commercial wines, making them unacceptable for sale [3]. Previous studies identified the presence of phenolic compounds in the natural precipitate of white wine [4], contributing to the hypothesis that these compounds could be involved in the mechanism of protein haze formation.