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…

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.

Identification, quantification and organoleptic impact of « dried fruit » molecular markers in Merlot and Cabernet Sauvignon grapes and in red wines

The aromas found in young Bordeaux red wines made with Merlot and Cabernet Sauvignon suggest a complex mixture of aromas of fresh red fruits such as cherry or blackberry for Merlot, and strawberry or blackcurrant for Cabernet Sauvignon. The aromas of these wines are closely linked with the maturity of the grapes. The climate change that has occurred during the last decade in Bordeaux has induced changes in the ripening conditions of grape berries. It is now widely admitted that over-ripening of the berries during hot and dry summers results in the development of characteristic flavors reminiscent of cooked fruits (fig, prune). The presence of these overriding odors found in both musts and young wines affects the quality and subtlety of the wine flavor and may shorten its shelf life.

Influence of preflowering basal leaf removal on aromatic composition of cv. Tempranillo wine from semiarid climate (Extremadura Western Spain)

Abstract In this work the effects of early leaf removal performed manually at preflowering phenological stage, on the volatile composition of Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L.) wines were studied. From 2009-2011 vintages 34 wine volatile compounds were identified and quantified by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) where early leaf removal only modified 25 of them. The total C6 compounds, acetates and volatiles acids (with exception of isobutyric acid) were affected by defoliation, whereas alcohols and esters showed a minor effect. Furthermore the vintage effect also was shown.

How pressing techniques affect must composition and wine quality of Pinot blanc

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.

Effect of mixed Torulaspora delbrueckii-Saccharomyces cerevisiae culture on rose quality wine

Alcoholic fermentation using no Saccharomyces wine is an effective means of modulating wine aroma. This study investigated the impact of coinoculating Torulaspora delbruecki with two Saccharomyces cerevisiae commercial yeast (QA23, Lallemand; Red Fruit, Sepsa-Enartis) on enological quality parameters, volatile composition and sensory analysis. The following assays were performed on Tempranillo variety: Saccharomyces QA23 (CTQA), Saccharomyces Red Fruit (CTRF), coinoculated T. delbrueckii + S.cerevisiae QA23 (CIQA) and coinoculated T. delbrueckii + S.cerevisiae (CIRF).