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…

Impact of smoke exposure on the chemical composition of grapes

Vineyard exposure to smoke can lead to grapes and wine which exhibit objectionable smoky and ashy aromas and flavours, more commonly known as ‘smoke taint’ [1, 2]. In the last decade, significant bushfires have occurred around the world, including near wine regions in Australia, Canada, South Africa and the USA, as a consequence of the warmer, drier conditions associated with climate change. Considerable research has subsequently been undertaken to determine the chemical, sensory and physiological consequences of grapevine exposure to smoke. The sensory attributes associated with smoke-tainted wine have been linked to the presence of several smoke-derived volatile phenols, such as guaiacols, syringols and cresols [2].

Removal of Fumonisin B1 and B2 from red wine using polymeric substances

The Ability of PVPP (Polyvinylpolypyrrolidone), PVP-DEGMA-TAIC (copolimerization of N-vinyl-2-pyrrolidinone with ethylene glycol dimethacrylate and triallyl isocyanurate) and PAEGDMA
(poly(acrylamide-co-ethylene glycol dimethacrylate)) polymers was tested as removal agents for Fumonisin B1 (FB1) and Fumonisin B2 (FB2) from model solutions and red wine. The polymers removal capacity was checked at three different resident times (2, 8 and 24 hours of contact time between the polymer and the sample), showing no differences in the percentage of FB1 and FB2 removal. Then, different polymer concentrations (1, 5 and 10 mg mL-1) were tested in model solution with and without phenolics (i.e. gallic acid and 4-methylcatechol).

Simultaneous monitoring of dissolved CO2 and collar from Rosé sparkling wine glasses: the impact of yeast macromolecules

Champagne or sparkling wines elaborated through the same traditional method, which consists in two major yeast-fermented steps, typically hold about 10 to 12 g/L of dissolved CO2 after the second fermentation in a closed bottle. Hundreds of molecules and macromolecules originating from grape and yeast cohabit with dissolved CO2; they are essential compounds contributing to many organoleptic characteristics (effervescence, foam, aroma, taste, colour…). Indeed, the second alcoholic fermentation and the maturation on lees (which may last from 12 months up to several years) both induce various quantitative and qualitative changes in the wine through the action of yeast, as listed hereafter: development of aromas during aging on lees, release of nitrogen compounds during autolysis and release of macromolecules (polysaccharides, lipids, nucleic acids) in wine.

Technological possibilities of grape marc cell walls as wine fining agent. Effect on wine phenolic composition

Fining is a technique that is used to remove unwanted wine components that affect clarification, astringency, color, bitterness, and aroma. Fining involves the addition of adsorptive or reactive material in order to reduce or eliminate the presence of certain less desirable wine components and to ensure that a wine remains in a particular stable state for a given period of time Recently concerns have been raised about the addition of animal proteins, such as gelatin, to wine due to the disease known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy (Mad Cow disease). Although the origin of gelatins has been moved to porcine, winemakers are asking for substitute products with properties and application protocols similar to the traditional animal-derived ones, making the use of plant-derived proteins in fining a practically viable possibility. As a consequence, various fining agents derived from plants have been proposed, including proteins from cereals, legumes, and potato.

Modulating role of SO2 in white wine protein haze formation

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].