Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Effect of intra‐vineyard ripeness variation on the efficiency of commercial enzymes on berry cell wall deconstruction under winemaking conditions

Effect of intra‐vineyard ripeness variation on the efficiency of commercial enzymes on berry cell wall deconstruction under winemaking conditions

Abstract

Intra-vineyard variation grape berry ripening occurs within bunches, between bunches on the same vine and between vines. Although it is assumed that such variation also occurs at the grape berry cell wall level, no study to data has investigated in any depth. Here we have used a intra-vineyard panel design to investigate pooled bunches from six vines (per panel) in the context of a winemaking scenario. The dissected vineyard was harvested by separate panels, where each panel was then subjected to a standard winemaking procedure with or without the addition of three different enzyme preparations for maceration. Adjacent untreated panels acted as the enzyme controls. Hence we combined two studies into one design. Cell wall material harvested from the treated and untreated panels were subjected to high throughput cell wall profiling tools combined with multivariate data analysis. The study showed that significant variation at the cell wall polymer level occurred across the vineyard amongst the different panels. Furthemore, all enzyme applications had a strong and clear effect in reducing this variation through de-pectination. What was most interesting is that while de-pectination occurred the levels of esterification were unaffected by the enzymes. This is a positive for wine quality as no methanol or acetates would have been produced from the de-pectination and not all natural grape berry variation is affected. This study provides clear evidence that enzymes can positively influence the consistency of winemaking without necessarily removing all variability provided from the vineyard. This study provides a foundation for further research into the relationship with grape berry cell wall architecture and enzyme formulations.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

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

*Institute for Wine Biotechnology

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Use of chitosan as a secondary antioxidant in juices and wines

Chitosan is a polysaccharide produced from the deacetylation of chitin extracted from crustaceous and fungi. In winemaking chitosan is mainly used in the clarification of grape juice and wine, stabilization of white wines, removal of metals and to prevent wine spoilage by undesired microorganisms. The addition of chitosan to model wine systems was able to retard browning, reduce levels of metallic ions (Fe and Cu) and to protect varietal thiols due to its antiradical activity1. The present experiment was planned in order to evaluate the use of chitosan as a secondary antioxidant at three different stages of Sauvignon blanc fermentation and winemaking. Sauvignon blanc juices from three different locations were obtained at a commercial winery in Marlborough, New Zealand. One lots of grapes was collected from a receival bin and pressed into juice with a water-bag press, and a further juice sample was collected from a commercial pressing operation. Chitosan (1 g/L, low molecular weight, 75 – 85% deacetylated) was added to the juice after pressing, after cold settling, after fermentation, or at all these stages. Controls without any chitosan additions were also prepared.

IBMP-Polypenol interactions: Impact on volatility and sensory perception in model wine solution

3-Isobutyl-2-methoxypyrazine (IBMP) is one of the key molecules in wine aroma with a bell pepper aroma and a very low threshold in wine, 1-6 ng/L for white wine and 10-16 ng/L in red wine1. The differences in these thresholds are likely due to IBMP-non volatile matrix interactions. It has indeed been shown that polyphenols may influence the volatility of flavor compounds2. In the present study, we focus on IBMP-polyphenols interactions in relation to volatility and sensory perception in model wine solution. Methods: 1. GC-MS Static Headspace Analysis: Samples were analyzed by Static headspace analysis with an Agilent 7890A gas chromatograph coupled to HP 5975C mass spectrometry detector (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA).

Effect of non-Saccharomyces yeast and lactic acid bacteria on selected sensory attributes and polyphenols of Syrah wines

Consumers predominantly use visual, aromatic and texture cues as quality/preference indicators to describe olfactory sensations. In this study, the effect of micro-organism in wine production was investigated using analytical and sensory techniques to achieve relevant analytical characterisation. Selected anthocyanins, flavan-3-ols, flavonols and phenolic acids were quantified in Syrah wines using RP-HPLC-DAD. Standard oenological parameters were also measured. Syrah grape must was fermented with various combinations of Saccharomyces cerevisiae (S. cerevisiae) and non-Saccharomyces (Metschnikowia pulcherrima or Hanseniaspora uvarum) yeasts, which was followed by sequential inoculation of lactic acid bacteria (LAB) (Oenococcus oeni or Lactobacillus plantarum).

Development and validation of a standardized oxidation assay for the accurate measurement of the ability of different wines to form “de novo” oxidation-related aldehydes

From the standpoint of wine aroma oxidation there are two effects observed: aroma degradation of oxygen sensitive compounds (polyfunctional mercaptans) and the appearance of new substances with high aromatic power (acetaldehyde, methional, phenylacetaldehyde, sotolon, alkenals, isobutanal and 2, 3-metylbutanals) (1-5). According to our experience, Strecker aldehydes are compounds with highest sensory relevance in the oxidative degradation of many wines (5-7).

Interest and impact of PVP/PVI (Polyvinylpyrrolidone/ Polyvinylimidazole) on winemaking and final quality of wines

Céline Sparrow a, Christophe Morge a, a SOFRALAB SAS, 79, av. A.A. Thévenet – CS 11031 – 51530 Magenta, France Consumers’ health and security force authorities to limit, in wine as in others food industry products, the concentration in « dangerous » molecules. Therefore the legal limit in heavy metals keeps on decreasing. As per proof EU regulation just decrease the stain concentration in wine from 0,2 to 0,15 mg/l. Certain changes , such as sodium arsenite treatment in vines, disappearance of brass in wineries to the benefit of stainless steel, limit even more the concentration of heavy metals in wines. But the use of copper derivates in vines treatments is difficult to replace. In the case of wine and its elaboration, the problem is even more complex. Indeed, regulation forces the wine producers to control the concentration of certain heavy metals in final wines.