Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Influence of methyl jasmonate foliar application to vineyard on grape volatile composition over three consecutive vintages

Influence of methyl jasmonate foliar application to vineyard on grape volatile composition over three consecutive vintages

Abstract

An alternative to improve grape quality is the application to the vineyard of elicitors. Although these compounds were first used to increase resistance of plants against pathogens, it has been found that they are also able to induce mechanisms involved in the synthesis of phenolic compounds and some amino acids. However, researches about the influence of elicitors on grape volatile composition are scarcely. Therefore, the aim of this work was to study the influence of methyl jasmonate (MeJ) foliar application on grape aroma composition over three consecutive vintages. MeJ was applied to Tempranillo grapevines at a concentration of 10 mM in 2013, 2014, and 2015 years. Control plants were sprayed with water. The treatments were applied to grapevine twice, at veraison and one week later, and for each application, 200 mL/plant were sprayed over leaves. The treatments were carried out in triplicate and were arranged in a complete randomized block design. Grape volatile composition (terpenes, C13 norisoprenoids, esters, benzenoids, and C6 compounds) was determined by HS-SPME-GC-MS. The statistical analysis was performed by ANOVA, considering grape volatile compounds as dependent variables and treatment and vintage as categorical factors. The results showed that the grape volatile content was different for each year. Regarding treatment factor, in the first year of study, foliar application of MeJ positively affected the presence of p-cymene, methyl jasmonate, and hexanal, and negatively to the content of 2-hexen-1-ol acetate, (z)-3-hexen-1-ol, and n-hexanol; the rest of the compounds were unaffected by the treatment. However, in the second year, the application of MeJ to grapevine showed a greater influence on the presence of volatile compounds in grape. The formation of all terpenes, with the exception of p-cymene, was negatively affected by the MeJ foliar application. For C13 norisoprenoids, the effect of the treatment was also negative for
norisoprenoids was unaffected by the MeJ treatment. Likewise, the grape level of esters and benzenoids was also negatively affected by the MeJ treatment. Finally, the MeJ treatment increased the presence of n-hexanol while (z)-3-hexen-1-ol was reduced; for the remaining C6 compounds no effect of the MeJ treatment was observed. It is noteworthy that the influence of the MeJ foliar application was positive for the grape volatile composition in the third year of study. The foliar application of MeJ favoured the synthesis of ten volatile compounds that are considered positive for grape aroma, while the rest of the positive compounds were unaffected, with the exception of geranyl acetone. In conclusion, grape volatile content and the effect of MeJ foliar application on it were dependent on the vintage.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

Teresa Garde-Cerdan*, Elisa Baroja, Javier Portu, Pilar Santamaría, Rosa López

*Instituto de Ciencias de la Vid y del Vino

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Metabolomics comparison of non-Saccharomyces yeasts in Sauvignon blanc and Shiraz

Saccharomyces cerevisiae (SC) is the main driver of alcoholic fermentation however, in wine, non-Saccharomyces species can have a powerful effect on aroma and flavor formation. This study aimed to compare untargeted volatile compound profiles from SPME-GC×GC-TOF-MS of Sauvignon blanc and Shiraz wine inoculated with six different non-Saccharomyces yeasts followed by SC. Torulaspora delbrueckii (TD), Lachancea thermotolerans (LT), Pichia kluyveri (PK) and Metschnikowia pulcherrima (MP) were commercial starter strains, while Candida zemplinina (CZ) and Kazachstania aerobia (KA), were isolated from wine grape environments. Each fermentation produced a distinct chemical profile that was unique for both grape musts. The SC-monoculture and CZ-SC sequential fermentations were the most distinctly different in the Sauvignon blanc while the LT-SC sequential fermentations were the most different from the control in the Shiraz fermentations.

Some applications come from a method to concentrate proteins

All techniques usually used to assay proteins was not reliable in vegetable extract due to interferences with the components included in extracts like polyphenols, tanins, pectines, aromatics compounds. Absorbance at 280nm, Kjeldhal assay, Biuret and Lowry methods, Acid Bicinchonique technique and Bradford assay give the results depending on the composition of extract, on the presence or not of detergent and on the raw material (Marchal, 1995). Another difficulty in these extracts for the quantification of proteins comes from the large amount of water included in vegetable and the low concentration of proteins. Thus in red wines, proteins are usually not taken into account due to their low concentration (typically below 10 mgL-1) and to the presence of anthocyanis and polyphenols.

New molecular evidence of wine yeast-bacteria interaction unraveled by untargeted metabolomic profiling

Bacterial malolactic fermentation (MLF) has a considerable impact on wine quality. The yeast strain used for primary fermentation can consistently stimulate (MLF+ phenotype) or inhibit (MLF- phenotype) malolactic bacteria and the MLF process as a function of numerous winemaking practices, but the molecular evidence behind still remains a mystery. In this study, such evidence was elucidated by the direct comparison of extracellular metabolic profiles of MLF+ and MLF- yeast phenotypes. Untargeted metabolomics combining ultrahigh-resolution FT-ICR-MS analysis, powerful machine learning methods and a comprehensive wine metabolite database, discovered around 800 putative biomarkers and 2500 unknown masses involved in phenotypic distinction.

Novel contribution to the study of mouth-feel properties in wines

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.

Simultaneous monitoring of dissolved CO2 and collar from Rosé sparkling wine glasses: the impact of yeast macromolecules

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.