Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 A combination of biotechnology tools and coopers elements for an alternative the addition of SO2 at the end of the malolactic fermentation in red wines or at the “mutage” for the “liquoreux” wines

A combination of biotechnology tools and coopers elements for an alternative the addition of SO2 at the end of the malolactic fermentation in red wines or at the “mutage” for the “liquoreux” wines

Abstract

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”. Biotechnological products are now available for effective antimicrobial actions. Lysozyme inhibits the lactic acid bacteria. Chitosan also acts on the lactic acid bacteria but also efficiently on Brettanomyces. Acid sorbic can be a help to control the development of the undesirable strains yeast strains. On the antioxidant effect oak wood could potentially play a protective role. The development of an electrochemical sensor was used to estimate the influence of different cooperage factors on the antioxydant capacity(CaOx)suitable to be transmit by the wood at the wine. For red wines, during two successive vintages in two different wineries, tests compared classical post-MLF SO2 additions (5 g/hL) in classic new barrels to a treatment with a mixture of lysozyme and chitosan in CaOx optimized barrels. Microbiological monitoring has been done like chemical assays and wines tasted by expert panels. Barrels were also fitted with an innovative device allowing to measure dissolved oxygen without to have to open the barrel. In two different “Sauternes” wineries, test have been done to compare a classic mutage (between 10 and 25 g/hL of SO2) in classic barrels to a half a dose of SO2 and adding a supplement chitosan and sorbic acid in in CaOx optimized barrels. The impact on the microbial flora were investigated as well as the impact on the quality of wine. The innovative device for measuring dissolved oxygen was also used. All these wines were followed until the end of the harvest of breeding, ie on breeding periods of 6-18 months to understand the stability over time of the results. The results show that the test wines are microbiologically more stable than control wines. In the most of the case, always for the wine experiments and often for the “liqoureux”, the dissolved oxygen levels are also lower. Some metabolites (volatile phenols, diacetyl, and acetaldehyde) are less concentrated and colors are more intense and more stable. At the end, the combination of biotechnology tools and CAOX appears of a very efficient has emerged as a very effective technique to reduce the amount of total SO2 in wine as currently requested by consumers and by legislators.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

Vincent Renouf*, Marie Mirabel

*Chêne & Cie

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Ageing of sweet wines: oxygen evolution according to bung and barrel type

Barrel ageing is a crucial step in the wine process because it allows many changes to the wine as enrichment, colour stabilization, clarification and also a slow oxygenation. Effects of the oak barrel have to be known to prevent oxidation of the wine. The type of bung used during ageing is also a parameter to consider. Ageing sweet wines in barrel is a real challenge. These wines may need some oxygen at the beginning of ageing but they should be protected at the end of their maturation, to avoid oxidation.

Fining-Derived Allergens in Wine: from Detection to Quantification

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).

Metabolomic profile of red non-V. vinifera genotypes

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.

New biological tools to control and secure malolactic fermentation in high pH wines

Originally, the role of the malolactic fermentation (MLF) was simply to improve the microbial stability of wine via biological deacidification. However, there is an accumulation of evidence to support the fact that lactic acid bacteria (LAB) also contribute positively to the taste and aroma of wine. Many different LAB enter into grape juice and wine from the surface of grape berries, cluster stems, vine leaves, soil and winery equipment. Due to the highly selective environment of juices and wine, only a few types of LAB are able to grow.

Effect of intra‐vineyard ripeness variation on the efficiency of commercial enzymes on berry cell wall deconstruction under winemaking conditions

Intra-vineyard variation grape berry ripening occurs within bunches, between bunches on the same vine and between vines. Although it is assumed that such variation also occurs at the grape berry cell wall level, no study to data has investigated in any depth. Here we have used a intra-vineyard panel design to investigate pooled bunches from six vines (per panel) in the context of a winemaking scenario. The dissected vineyard was harvested by separate panels, where each panel was then subjected to a standard winemaking procedure with or without the addition of three different enzyme preparations for maceration.