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…

Evaluation of Polarized Projective Mapping as a possible tool for attributing South African Chenin blanc dry wine styles

Multiple Factor Analysis (MFA) 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), classically attributed with the help of sensory evaluation. One of the “rapid methods” has drawn our attention for the purpose of simplifying and making style attribution for large sample sets, evaluated during different sessions, more robust. Polarized Projective Mapping (PPM) is a hybrid of Projective Mapping (PM) and Polarised Sensory Positioning (PSP). It is a reference-based method in which poles
(references) are used for the evaluation of similarities and dissimilarities between samples.

Spontaneous fermentation dynamics of indigenous yeast populations and their effect on the sensory properties of Riesling

Varietal Riesling aroma relies strongly on the formation and liberation of bound aroma compounds. Floral monoterpenes, green C6-alcohols, fruity C13-norisoprenoids and spicy volatile phenols are predominantly bound to disaccharides, which are produced and stored in the grape berry during berry maturation. Grape processing aims to extract maximum amount of the precursors from the berry skin to increase the potential for a strong varietal aroma in the wine. Subsequent yeast selection plays an important part in this process.

Full automation of oenological fermentations and its application to the processing of must containing high sugar or acetic acid concentrations

Climate change and harvest date decisions have led to the evolution of must quality over the last decades. Increases in must sugar concentrations are among the most obvious consequences, quantitatively. Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a robust and acid tolerant organism. These properties, its sugar to ethanol conversion rate and ethanol tolerance make it the ideal production organism for wine fermentations. Unfortunately, high sugar concentrations may affect S. cerevisiae and lead to growth inhibition or yeast lysis, and cause sluggish or stuck fermentations. Even sublethal conditions cause a hyperosmotic stress response in S. cerevisiae which leads to increased formation of fermentation by-products, including acetic acid, which may exceed legal limits in some wines.

DNA and type of grain: which factor does better explain sensory differences of sessile and pedunculate oaks?

Sessile oak and pedunculate oak have shown several differences of interest for enological purposes. Tannic and aromatic composition among sessile oak or pedonculate oak has been well studied. Sessile oak is generally more aromatic than pedunculated, while the later is more tannic. This scientific point of view is rarely applied to classify oak in cooperages. Most coopers use the type of grain to distinguish wide and thin grain.

Identification of caffeic acid as a major component of Moscatel wine protein sediment

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.