Impact of industrial-scale serial filtration on macromolecules in red wines

This study investigates how the sensory profile of Pinot Blanc is affected from different maceration and pressing techniques. Grapes were sourced from four vineyards in the village Tramin in South Tyrol. For the experiment 200 kg of grapes from each vineyard site were hand picked the day before harvest for the commercial winery took place. Grapes were stored over night at 4°C, homogenized and processed in the experimental winery at Laimburg research centre the day after harvest. Four different pressing techniques were applied in duplicates of 100kg each.

Champagne or sparkling wines elaborated through the same traditional method, which consists in two major yeast-fermented steps, typically hold about 10 to 12 g/L of dissolved CO2 after the second fermentation in a closed bottle. Hundreds of molecules and macromolecules originating from grape and yeast cohabit with dissolved CO2; they are essential compounds contributing to many organoleptic characteristics (effervescence, foam, aroma, taste, colour…). Indeed, the second alcoholic fermentation and the maturation on lees (which may last from 12 months up to several years) both induce various quantitative and qualitative changes in the wine through the action of yeast, as listed hereafter: development of aromas during aging on lees, release of nitrogen compounds during autolysis and release of macromolecules (polysaccharides, lipids, nucleic acids) in wine.

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”.

In general, there is a well-established lexicon related to wine aroma and taste properties; however mouth-feel-related vocabulary usually includes heterogeneous, multimodal and personalized terms. Gawel et al.
(2000) published a wheel related to mouthfeel properties of red wine. However, its use in scientific publications has been limited. The authors accepted that the approach had certain limitations as it included redundant and terms with hedonic tone and some others were absent. It is of high interest to generate a mouth-feel lexicon and finding the chemical compound or group of compounds responsible for such properties in red wine. In the present work a chemical fractionation method has been developed.

Proteins play a significant role in the colloidal stability and clarity of white wines [1]. However, under conditions of high temperatures during storage or transportation, the proteins themselves can self-aggregate into light-dispersing particles causing the so-called protein haze [2]. Formation of these unattractive precipitates in bottled wine is a common defect of commercial wines, making them unacceptable for sale [3]. Previous studies identified the presence of phenolic compounds in the natural precipitate of white wine [4], contributing to the hypothesis that these compounds could be involved in the mechanism of protein haze formation.