Defining the mechanisms and impact of winemaking treatments on tannin and polysaccharides in red wine: recent progress in creating diverse styles

Limited information is available on grape wall-derived polymeric structure/composition and how this changes during fermentation. Commercial winemaking operations use enzymes that target the polysaccharide-rich polymers of the cell walls of grape tissues to clarify musts and extract pigments during the fermentations. In this study we have assessed changes in polysaccharide composition/ turnover throughout the winemaking process by applying recently developed cell wall profiling approaches to both wine and pomace polysaccharides. The methods included gas chromatography for monosaccharide composition (GC-MS), infra-red (IR) spectroscopy and comprehensive microarray polymer profiling
(CoMPP) using cell wall probes.

The chemical mechanisms involved in oxidation/reduction potential of wine during winemaking and aging are affecting its color, aroma and taste. Chemical oxidation is one of the major causes of development of off-flavors during ageing1. Thus, the chemical changes in wine during storage should be controlled to ensure the sensory quality of the product and avoid consumer rejection that will compromise the economic value of the product. The 1-hydroxyethyl radical has been recognized as the key radical intermediate in the oxidative reactions in wine2. Based on the kinetic study of POBN-1-hydroxyethyl spin adduct formation in wines initiated via the Fenton reaction, a novel tool was recently developed in our laboratory to quantify the resistance of wines against oxidation3.

Fungal bunch rots of grapes cause major losses to grape yield worldwide, yet the impact these moulds have on grape and wine quality is not well characterised. We sought to investigate the formation of unwanted volatile compounds of fungal origin in both synthetic grape juice culture media and in inoculated grape berries. Botrytis cinerea, Aspergillus niger, Aspergillus carbonarius, or Pencillium expansum were grown in synthetic grape juice medium and the culture homogenates analysed 4 and 7 days post inoculation. HS-SPME-GC-MS analysis of the culture homogenates 4 days post inoculation demonstrated that each of the fungi examined produced varying quantities of the mushroom or fungus-like aroma compounds, 1-Octen-3-ol, 1-Octen-3-one and 3-Octanone with A. carbonarius producing up to ten times the amounts of all three metabolites per mg of dry mycelium.

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].

A misconception lingers in the minds of some wine consumers that Champagne wines don’t age. It’s largely a myth, certainly as far as the best cuvees are concerned. Actually, during the so-called autolysis period of time (in the closed bottle, after the “prise de mousse”), complex chemical reactions take place when the wine remains in contact with the dead yeast cells, which progressively bring complex and very much sought-after aromas to champagne. Nevertheless, despite their remarkable impermeability to liquid and air, caps or natural cork stoppers used to cork the bottles are not 100% hermetic with regard to gas transfers. Gas species therefore very slowly diffuse through the cap or cork stopper, along their respective inverse partial pressure. After the “prise de mousse”, because the partial pressure of CO2 in the bottleneck reaches up to 6 bars (at 12 °C), gaseous CO2 progressively diffuse from the bottle to the ambient air
(where the partial pressure of gaseous CO2 is only of order of 0,0004 bar).