Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Prediction of the production kinetics of the main fermentative aromas in alcoholic fermentation

Prediction of the production kinetics of the main fermentative aromas in alcoholic fermentation

Abstract

Fermentative aromas (especially esters and higher alcohols) highly impact the organoleptic profile of young and white wines. The production of these volatile compounds depends mainly on temperature and Yeast Available Nitrogen (YAN) content in the must. Available dynamic models predict the main reaction (bioconversion of sugar into ethanol and CO2 production) but none of them considers the production kinetics of fermentative aroma compounds during the process of fermentation. We determined the production kinetics of the main esters and higher alcohols for different values of initial YAN content and temperature, using an innovative online monitoring Gas Chromatography device. We then elaborated a dynamic model predicting the synthesis of five fermentative aromas representative of three different chemical families: two higher alcohols (isobutanol, isoamyl alcohol), one acetate ester (isoamyl acetate) and two ethyl esters (ethyl hexanoate, ethyl octanoate). The online monitoring highlighted two successive linear phases of aroma compound production from sugar. We therefore began by modeling changes in the production yields of these compounds (aroma compound vs. sugar) depending on initial nitrogen concentration and temperature. We then integrated these yields into a previously developed model of the kinetics of sugar consumption during the fermentation process. We thus obtained a dynamic model predicting the production kinetics of volatile compounds throughout the alcoholic fermentation from initial nitrogen concentration and temperature values. The parameters of the model were identified from nine fermentations performed at temperatures between 18 and 30 ◦C and with initial YAN contents ranging from 70 to 410 mgN/L. The model was validated in six independent experiments with conditions in the same range. Predictions were accurate: the mean difference between experimental and estimated values for fermentative aroma synthesis throughout the process was below 10%, for both the fermentations used to build the model and those used for validation. This model is the first to simulate the production kinetics of fermentative aromas and provides new insight into the synthesis of these volatile compounds. It will facilitate the development of innovative strategies for controlling the production of those aromas in winemaking, through management of the principal control factors: YAN content and temperature during the alcoholic fermentation.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Article

Authors

Jean-Roch Mouret*, Cristian Trelea, Jean-Marie Sablayrolles, Vincent Farines

*INRA

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Pesticide removal in wine with a physical treatment by molecular sieving

All along the winemaking process, conditioning and aging, wine is susceptible to be contaminated by different molecules. Contaminations can have various origins, related to wine microorganisms or as a result of an exogenous contamination. The aforementioned contamination of the wine can be caused by the migration of molecules from the materials in contact with the wine or by a contamination from exogenous molecules present in the air. Regardless of the source of the contamination, mainly two types of consequences can be observed.

Quantification of the production of hydrogen peroxide H2O2 during wine oxidation

Chemical studies aiming at assessing how a wine reacts towards oxidation usually focus on the characterization of wine constituents, such as polyphenols, or oxidation products. As an alternative, the key oxidation intermediate hydrogen peroxide H2O2 has never been quantified, although it plays a pivotal role in wine oxidation. H2O2 is obtained from molecular oxygen as the result of a first cascade of oxidation reactions involving metal ions and polyphenols. The produced H2O2 then reacts in a second cascade of oxidation to produce reactive hydroxyl radicals that can attack almost any chemical substrate in wine.

Metabolomic profile of red non-V. vinifera genotypes

Vitis vinifera L. is the most widely cultivated Vitis species which includes numerous cultivars. Owing to their superior quality of grapes, these cultivars were long considered the only suitable for the production of fine wines. However, the lack of resistance genes in V. vinifera against major grapevine pathogens, requires for its cultivation frequent spraying with large amount of fungicides. Thus, the search for alternative and more sustainable methods to control the grapevine pathogens have brought the breeders to focus their attention on other Vitis species. In fact, wild Vitis genotypes present multiple resistance traits against pathogens, such as powdery mildew, downy mildew and phylloxera.

How do different oak treatment affect the sensory composition of Chenin blanc wines over time?

Wooden barrels have been the preferred method for oak maturation for wines, but the use of alternative oak products, such as staves and oak chips have increased in South Africa due to lower production costs. This study investigated the effect of different oak products used during fermentation and ageing on the sensory profile, degree of liking and perceived quality of a South African Chenin blanc wine. The different wine treatments included an unoaked tank control wine, wines matured in 5th fill barrels, wines matured in new barrels from three different cooperages, and wines matured in 5th fill barrels with stave inserts from two different cooperages.

Modulating role of SO2 in white wine protein haze formation

Despite the extensive research performed during the last decades, the multifactorial mechanism responsible for the white wine protein haze formation is not fully characterized. Herein, a new model is proposed, which is based on the experimental identification of sulfur dioxide as a major modulating factor inducing wine protein haze upon heating. As opposed to other reducing agents, such as 2-mercaptoethanol, dithiothreitol and tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine hydrochloride (TCEP), the addition of SO2 to must/wine upon heating cleaves intraprotein disulfide bonds, hinders thiol-disulfide exchange during protein interactions and can lead to the formation of novel inter/intraprotein disulfide bonds. Those are eventually responsible for wine protein aggregation which follows a nucleation-growth kinetic model as shown by dynamic light scattering [1].