Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Dissecting the polysaccharide‐rich grape cell wall matrix during the red winemaking process, using high‐throughput and fractionation methods

Dissecting the polysaccharide‐rich grape cell wall matrix during the red winemaking process, using high‐throughput and fractionation methods

Abstract

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. CoMPP performed on the concentrated soluble wine polysaccharides showed a fraction rich in rhamnogalacturonan I (RGI), homogalacturonan (HG) and Arabinogalactan proteins (AGPs). We also used chemical and enzymatic fractionation techniques in addition to CoMPP to understand the berry deconstruction process more in-depth. CoMPP and gravimetric analysis of the fractionated samples showed that thefermentation-derived pomace could be divided into a pectin-rich fraction (pulp tightly-bound to skins) containing HG, RGI and AGPs; and secondly, a xyloglucan-rich fraction (mainly skins). Interestingly this fraction was found to include pectins consisting of tightly-associated and highly methyl-esterified HG and RGI networks. A unique aspect is datasets suggesting that enzyme-resistant pectin polymers ‘coat’ the inner xyloglucan-rich skin cells. This data has important implications for developing effective strategies for efficient release of favourable compounds (pigments, tannins, aromatics, etc.) from the berry tissues during winemaking. This study provides a framework to understand the complex interactions between the grape matrix and carbohydrate-active enzymes to produce wine of desired quality and consistency.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Article

Authors

John Paul Moore*, Jonatan Fangel, Melane Vivier, William Willats, Yu Gao

*Stellenbosch University

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Evaluating South African Chenin blanc wine styles using an LC-MS screening method

Sorting Chenin blanc is one of the most important white wine cultivars in South Africa. It has received a lot of attention and accolades in the past years and more research than ever is dedicated to this versatile cultivar. According to the Chenin blanc association of South Africa, there are three recognized dry wine styles, Fresh and Fruity (FF), Rich and Ripe Unwooded
(RRU), and Rich and Ripe Wooded (RRW). They are traditionally established with the aid of expert sensory evaluation, but the cost and the (subjective) human factor are aspects to be taken into account. A more objective and possibly robust way of assessing and attributing these styles can be the use of chemical analysis.

Bentonite fining in cold wines: prediction tests, reduced efficiency and possibilities to avoid additional fining treatments

Bentonite fining is widely used to prevent protein haze in white wines. Most wineries use laboratory-scale fining trials to define the appropriate amount of bentonite to be used in the cellar. Those pre-tests need to mimic as much as possible the industrial scale fining procedure to determine the exact amount of bentonite necessary for protein stability. Nevertheless it is frequent that, after fining with the recommended amount of bentonite, wines appear still unstable and need an additional fining treatment. It remains a major challenge to understand why the same wine, fined with the same dosage of the same bentonite, achieves stability in the lab, but not in the cellar.

Testing the effectiveness of Cell-Wall material from grape pomace as fining agent for red wines

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.

Extraction of pathogenesis-related proteins and phenolics in Sauvignon Blanc as affected by different

The composition of wine is largely determined by the composition of pre-fermentation juice, which is influenced by extraction of grape components. Different grape harvesting and processing conditions could affect the extraction of grape components into juice. Among these grape components, pathogenesis-related (PR) proteins are of great concern for white wine maker as they are the main cause of haze formation in finished white wine. If not removed before bottling, these PR proteins may progress into haze through the formation of complex with phenolics under certain conditions. Thaumatin-like proteins (TLPs) and chitinases are the main constituents of PR proteins found in protein haze.

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

The Ability of PVPP (Polyvinylpolypyrrolidone), PVP-DEGMA-TAIC (copolimerization of N-vinyl-2-pyrrolidinone with ethylene glycol dimethacrylate and triallyl isocyanurate) and PAEGDMA
(poly(acrylamide-co-ethylene glycol dimethacrylate)) polymers was tested as removal agents for Fumonisin B1 (FB1) and Fumonisin B2 (FB2) from model solutions and red wine. The polymers removal capacity was checked at three different resident times (2, 8 and 24 hours of contact time between the polymer and the sample), showing no differences in the percentage of FB1 and FB2 removal. Then, different polymer concentrations (1, 5 and 10 mg mL-1) were tested in model solution with and without phenolics (i.e. gallic acid and 4-methylcatechol).