The effect of cropload on the volatile aroma characteristics of ‘Beihong’ and ‘Beimei’ red wine

Chemical studies aiming at assessing how a wine reacts towards oxidation usually focus on the characterization of wine constituents, such as polyphenols, or oxidation products. As an alternative, the key oxidation intermediate hydrogen peroxide H2O2 has never been quantified, although it plays a pivotal role in wine oxidation. H2O2 is obtained from molecular oxygen as the result of a first cascade of oxidation reactions involving metal ions and polyphenols. The produced H2O2 then reacts in a second cascade of oxidation to produce reactive hydroxyl radicals that can attack almost any chemical substrate in wine.

Phenolic compounds are secondary metabolites of grapes. Plants produce a wide variety of this type of metabolites through diverse biosynthesis pathways and their production is sometimes a response to external stimuli, either environmental or biotic stresses. Some of them may act as chemical defenses against pathogens or herbivores and their synthesis is increased when the attack exists. However, it is remarkable that the synthesis of these interesting compounds can be activated even when the stimulus is not present, with the use of elicitors. These are substances that when applied exogenously trigger the biosynthetic pathways conducting to the synthesis of these defense compounds.

Vineyards are strongly exposed to fungal diseases, attacks from insects and competition with weeds. Most treatments used on grape vines contain synthetic active substances, which may be transferred to the wine. Such pesticides have a negative image because many active substances are potential health hazards. A specific oenological treatment allowing the reduction of pesticide residues in wine based on activated vegetable fibres (AVF) is under examination by the International Organisation for Vine and Wine. This technique works efficiently and alters the wine only little (Lempereur et al. 2014).

Climate change and harvest date decisions have led to the evolution of must quality over the last decades. Increases in must sugar concentrations are among the most obvious consequences, quantitatively. Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a robust and acid tolerant organism. These properties, its sugar to ethanol conversion rate and ethanol tolerance make it the ideal production organism for wine fermentations. Unfortunately, high sugar concentrations may affect S. cerevisiae and lead to growth inhibition or yeast lysis, and cause sluggish or stuck fermentations. Even sublethal conditions cause a hyperosmotic stress response in S. cerevisiae which leads to increased formation of fermentation by-products, including acetic acid, which may exceed legal limits in some wines.

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).