Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Impact of drought stress on concentration and composition of wine proteins in Riesling

Impact of drought stress on concentration and composition of wine proteins in Riesling

Abstract

Protein haze in white wines is a major technological and economic problem of the wine industry. Field tests were carried out in steep slope vineyards planted with Riesling grapes over 3 dry growing seasons to study the effect of drought stress on the concentration of proteins in the resulting wines. Plots suffering from drought stress were compared with surrounding drip irrigated plots. Riesling grapes were processed into wines by conventional procedures. Protein amounts of the isolated wine colloids of the stressed samples were always higher than those of the watered samples(mean watered 13.8 ± 0.44, mean stressed 17.4 ± 0.40 g 100 g-1). As a consequence, higher bentonite doses were needed to achieve protein haze stability of the drought stressed treatments. Concerning the amino acid composition of the proteins, there were no significant differences between stressed and watered treatments. Sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) revealed, that the molecular weights of proteins ranged from 12-75 kDa with an accumulation of chitinases and thaumatin-like proteins (TLPs) between 20-30 kDa. Concerning the protein bands, minor differences became obvious only between vintages but not between stressed and watered samples. In-solution digest of proteins from Riesling grapes 2008 followed by LCMSn and data base research identified 15 proteins originating from grapes and 10 from the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

Frank Will*, Heinz Decker, Helmut Dietrich, Manfred Stoll, Miriam Meier, Nadine Jäckels, Petra Fronk, Stefan Tenzer

*Hochschule Geisenheim University

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Metabolomics of grape polyphenols as a consequence of post-harvest drying: on-plant dehydration vs warehouse withering

A method of suspect screening analysis to study grape metabolomics, was developed [1]. By performing ultra-high performance liquid chromatography (UHPLC) – high-resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) analysis of the grape extract, averaging 320-450 putative grape compounds are identified which include mainly polyphenols. Identification of metabolites is performed by a new HRMS-database of putative grape and wine compounds expressly constructed (GrapeMetabolomics) which currently includes around 1,100 entries.

Novel analytical technologies for wine fingerprinting in and beyond the laboratory

For characterization, sensory designing and authentication rapid analytical technologies have become available. Some, like Proton Transfer Reaction Mass Spectrometry allow a rapid spectrum of the volatile compounds of wines. Combined with chemometrics wines can be characterized. The same approach can be used to calculate the results of virtual mixtures and allow formulation of constant quality blends. Other new techniques and portable devices based on spectroscopy allow measurements on production sites and in grocery stores, even for the smart consumer. We will present some examples of the application of these techniques for authentication of wines, both in the laboratory and on site.

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).

Cytochrome P450 CYP71BE5 from grapevine (Vitis vinifera) catalyzes the formation of the spicy aroma compound, (-)-rotundone

(-)-Rotundone, an oxygenated sesquiterpene, is a potent odorant molecule with a characteristic spicy aroma existing in various plants including grapes1. It is considered as a significant compound notably in wines and grapes because of its low sensory threshold (16 ng L-1 in red wine, 8 ng L-1 in water) and aroma properties. (-)-Rotundone was first identified in red wine made from the grape cultivar Syrah (regionally called Shiraz) in Australia1, and then it was found in several grape varieties such as Duras, Grüner Veltliner, Schioppettino and Vespolina from Europe2, 3. Several environmental factors affecting the accumulation of (-)-Rotundone during the grape maturation, were reported such as ambient temperature4, soil properties and topography5, soil moisture from irrigation and light exposure in the bunch zone by leaf removal2.

Red wine substituted esters involved in fruity aromatic expression: an enantiomeric approach to understand their sensory impact and their pathway formation

Among red wines ethyl esters, those from short hydroxylated and branched-chain aliphatic acids constitute a family with a particular behavior and sensory importance. They have been previously discussed in the literature [1] and recent studies have established that some of them were strongly involved in of red wines’ fruity aroma [2]. As some among them have an asymmetrical carbon atom, it seemed important to separate their different enantiomers to obtain an accurate assessment of their organoleptic impact. Three chiral esters have been identified, presenting alkyl and/or hydroxyle substituants: ethyl 2-hydroxy-4-methylpentanoate, ethyl 2-methylbutanoate, and ethyl 3-hydroxybutanoate.