Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Grape metabolites, aroma precursors and the complexities of wine flavour

Grape metabolites, aroma precursors and the complexities of wine flavour

Abstract

A critical aspect of wine quality from a consumer perspective is the overall impression of wine flavour, which is formed by the interplay of volatile aroma compounds, their precursors, and taste and matrix components. Grapes contribute some potent aroma compounds, together with a large pool of non-volatile precursors (e.g. glycoconjugates and amino acid conjugates). Aroma precursors can break down through chemical hydrolysis reactions, or through the action of yeast or enzymes, significantly changing the aroma profile of a wine during winemaking and storage. In addition, glycoconjugates of monoterpenes, norisoprenoids and volatile phenols, together with sulfur-conjugates in wine, provide a reservoir of additional flavour through the in-mouth release of volatiles which may be perceived retro-nasally. In this presentation a summary will be presented about recent research into the contribution to wine aroma and flavour from glycoside precursors of terpenes [1], norisoprenoids [1, 2] and phenols [3, 4], and also about aroma compound formation from sesquiterpene- [5] and sulfur-precursors [6, 7]. The diverse mechanisms involved in formation and degradation of wine aroma precursors will be discussed, as well as practical implications for grape growing and winemaking.

1. Black et al. (2015) Terpenoids and their role in wine flavour: recent advances. AJGWR 21, 582–600. 2. Kwasniewski et al. (2010) Timing of cluster light environment manipulation during grape development affects C13 norisoprenoid and carotenoid concentrations in Riesling. JAFC 58, 6841–6849. 3. Parker et al. (2012) The contribution of several volatile phenols and their glycoconjugates to smoke related sensory properties of red wine. JAFC 60: 2629-2637. 4. Mayr et al. (2014) Determination of the importance of in-mouth release of volatile phenol glycoconjugates to the flavor of smoke-tainted wines. JAFC 62: 2327-2336. 5.Herderich et al. (2015) Terroir effects on grape and wine aroma compounds. In: Advances in Wine Research; ACS Symposium Series 1203, 131-146. 6. Capone et al. (2012) Effects on 3-mercaptohexan-1-ol precursor concentrations from prolonged storage of Sauvignon Blanc grapes prior to crushing and pressing. JAFC 60: 3515-3523. 7.Viviers et al. (2013) Effects of five metals on the evolution of hydrogen sulfide, methanethiol, and dimethyl sulfide during anaerobic storage of Chardonnay and Shiraz wines. JAFC 61: 12385-12396.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Article

Authors

Markus Herderich*

*AWRI

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Effect of nanofiltration on the chemical composition and wine quality

In Enology the conventional processes of filtration for clarification and stabilization are giving place to alternative membrane processes, including nanofiltration (NF). Furthermore, the increased alcohol content in wines recorded in recent years became an important issue for all the main wine producing countries. Among techniques available to the wine industry to reduce the ethanol content, NF is certainly one of the newest. This study is focused on the evaluation of NF influence on wine physical-chemical composition, including mineral content, which in accordance to our best knowledge is a novelty.

Directed Evolution of Oenococcus oeni: optimising yeast-bacteria interactions for improved malolactic fermentation

Malolactic fermentation (MLF) is a secondary step in the vinification process and it follows alcoholic fermentation (AF) which is predominantly carried out by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. These two processes result in the degradation of metabolites to produce secondary metabolites which also contribute to the final wine flavour and quality. AF results in the production of ethanol and carbon dioxide from sugars and MLF stems from the degradation of L-malic acid (a dicarboxylic acid) to L-lactic acid (a monocarboxylic acid). The latter process results in a smoother texture as the acidity of the wine is reduced by the process, it also adds to the flavour complexity of the wine.

New molecular evidence of wine yeast-bacteria interaction unraveled by untargeted metabolomic profiling

Bacterial malolactic fermentation (MLF) has a considerable impact on wine quality. The yeast strain used for primary fermentation can consistently stimulate (MLF+ phenotype) or inhibit (MLF- phenotype) malolactic bacteria and the MLF process as a function of numerous winemaking practices, but the molecular evidence behind still remains a mystery. In this study, such evidence was elucidated by the direct comparison of extracellular metabolic profiles of MLF+ and MLF- yeast phenotypes. Untargeted metabolomics combining ultrahigh-resolution FT-ICR-MS analysis, powerful machine learning methods and a comprehensive wine metabolite database, discovered around 800 putative biomarkers and 2500 unknown masses involved in phenotypic distinction.

Reduction of herbaceous aromas by wine lactic acid bacteria mediated degradation of volatile aldehydes

Consumers typically prefer wines with floral and fruity aromas over those presenting green-pepper, vegetal or herbaceous notes. Pyrazines have been identified as causatives for herbaceous notes in wines, especially Bordeaux reds. However, pyrazines are not universally responsible for herbaceousness, and several other wine volatile compounds are known to produce distinct vegetal/herbaceous aromas in wines. Specifically, volatile aldehydes elicit sensations of herbaceousness or grassiness and have been described in wines well above their perception thresholds.

Metabolomics comparison of non-Saccharomyces yeasts in Sauvignon blanc and Shiraz

Saccharomyces cerevisiae (SC) is the main driver of alcoholic fermentation however, in wine, non-Saccharomyces species can have a powerful effect on aroma and flavor formation. This study aimed to compare untargeted volatile compound profiles from SPME-GC×GC-TOF-MS of Sauvignon blanc and Shiraz wine inoculated with six different non-Saccharomyces yeasts followed by SC. Torulaspora delbrueckii (TD), Lachancea thermotolerans (LT), Pichia kluyveri (PK) and Metschnikowia pulcherrima (MP) were commercial starter strains, while Candida zemplinina (CZ) and Kazachstania aerobia (KA), were isolated from wine grape environments. Each fermentation produced a distinct chemical profile that was unique for both grape musts. The SC-monoculture and CZ-SC sequential fermentations were the most distinctly different in the Sauvignon blanc while the LT-SC sequential fermentations were the most different from the control in the Shiraz fermentations.