Elicitors used as a tool to increase stilbenes in grapes and wines

Vitis vinifera L. is the most widely cultivated Vitis species which includes numerous cultivars. Owing to their superior quality of grapes, these cultivars were long considered the only suitable for the production of fine wines. However, the lack of resistance genes in V. vinifera against major grapevine pathogens, requires for its cultivation frequent spraying with large amount of fungicides. Thus, the search for alternative and more sustainable methods to control the grapevine pathogens have brought the breeders to focus their attention on other Vitis species. In fact, wild Vitis genotypes present multiple resistance traits against pathogens, such as powdery mildew, downy mildew and phylloxera.

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”.

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].

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).

The effectiveness of enzyme-mediated maceration processes in red winemaking relies on a clear picture of the target (berry cell wall structure) to achieve the optimum combination of specific enzymes to be used. However, we lack the information on both essential factors of the reaction (i.e. specific activities in commercial enzyme preparation and the cell wall structure of berry tissue). In this study, the different combinations of pure recombinant enzymes and the recently validated high throughput cell wall profiling tools were applied to extend our knowledge on the grape berry cell wall polymeric deconstruction during the winemaking following a combinatorial enzyme treatment design.