Removal of Fumonisin B1 and B2 from red wine using polymeric substances

A part, at least, of the fruity aroma of red wines is the consequence of perceptive interactions between various aromatic compounds, particularly ethyl esters and acetates, which may contribute to the perception of fruity aromas, specifically thanks to synergistic effects.1,2 The question of the indirect impact of non-fruity compounds on this particular aromatic expression has not yet been widely investigated. Among these compounds higher alcohols (HA) represent the main group, from a quantitative standpoint, of volatiles in many alcoholic beverages. Moreover, some bibliographic data suggested their contribution to the aromatic complexity by either increasing or masking flavors of wine, depending of their concentrations.

One of the major determinants of wine quality is the aroma. Wine aroma is the human perception of the matrix of grape and yeast derived volatiles and their interaction that contribute to flavour wine. Most common are higher alcohols, ester and aldehydes. In previous studies the formation of characteristic volatile compounds have been linked to the metabolism of branched-chain and aromatic amino acids
(BCAAs) in synthetic grape must. Here we report on an investigation to assess the impact of the initial amino acid concentration on the production of aroma compounds by the industrial yeast VIN13 grown in both synthetic and real grape musts.

Most vineyards are grafted and include a variety (Vitis vinifera) grafted over a wild Vitis rootstock (hybrids of V. berlandieri, riparia and rupestris). Grape berry quality at harvest depends on a subtle balance between acidity and the concentrations of sugars, polyphenols and precursors of aroma compounds. The mechanisms controlling the balance of sugars/acids/polyphenols are influenced by the abiotic environment, in particular nitrogen supply, and interact with the genotypes of both the scion variety and the rootstock. Previous work suggests that some of the effects of water stress are in fact linked to a nitrogen deficiency driven indirectly by the reduction of water absorption.

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].

Lately several works highlighted the capacity of grape cell-wall material (CWM) to interact with proanthocyanidins (PA), indicating its potential use as fining agent for red wines.1–4 However, those studies were performed by using purified PAs and very high doses of CWM (almost ten-fold higher than those used in wine industry for other commercial fining agents). The present study focuses on the applicability of CWM from Cabernet sauvignon pomace as fining agent for red wines under real winery conditions. Grapes of cultivar Cabernet sauvignon were harvested at three different maturity levels
(unripe, mature, and overripe) and used for red winemaking. The pomace of such vinifications were used as source of CWM, and applied into red wines at two different concentrations: 0.2 g/L and 2.5 g/L.