Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Using combinations of recombinant pectinases to elucidate the deconstruction of the polysaccharide‐rich grape cell wall during winemaking

Using combinations of recombinant pectinases to elucidate the deconstruction of the polysaccharide‐rich grape cell wall during winemaking

Abstract

The effectiveness of enzyme-mediated maceration processes in red winemaking relies on a clear picture of the target (berry cell wall structure) to achieve the optimum combination of specific enzymes to be used. However, we lack the information on both essential factors of the reaction (i.e. specific activities in commercial enzyme preparation and the cell wall structure of berry tissue). In this study, the different combinations of pure recombinant enzymes and the recently validated high throughput cell wall profiling tools were applied to extend our knowledge on the grape berry cell wall polymeric deconstruction during the winemaking following a combinatorial enzyme treatment design. The multivariate data analysis on the glycan microarray (CoMPP) and gas chromatography (GC) datat revealed that the pectin lyase performed as effectively as commercial enzyme preparations in de-pectination of berry cell walls, and the combination of endo-polygalacturonase and pectin methyl esterase did not degrade the pectin as we predicted, but rather unraveled it.The combinations that contained other enzymes were shown to degrade side chains, but not de-pectinate and de-polymerise, also provided useful and new information on the complexity of the grape berry cell wall architecture. By adding the information acquired from this study to previous berry cell wall studies, a hypothetical model describing cell wall structure of different tissue types of grape berry was established. This model can aid us in a number of future studies apart from winemaking, such as fruit development and ripening and plant pathogen interactions of grapes. Most importantly it provides testable hypotheses for future studies on grape berry deconstruction using wine enzymes tailored for specific applications in winemaking.

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…

The impact of different yeasts and harvest time on the wine quality of Beihong and Beimei (<I>V. vinifera x V. amurensis</I>)

Beihong and Beimei are two wine cultivars from ‘Muscat Hamberg’ (V. vinifera L.) and wild V. amurensis Rupr., which were released in China in 2008. Here,two enology practices were reported. Firstly, the impact of different yeasts including D254, GRE, K1, D21 and BDX on dry wine quality of Beihong and Beimei was investigated. For Beihong, among wines fermented by all yeasts, residual sugar content was the lowest, total anthocyanin and resveratrol contents were the highest in the wine by D254. However, the wine by D254 had lower titrable acid than those by the other yeasts except BDX.

Effect of supplementation with inactive yeast during alcoholic fermentation in base wine for sparkling

INTRODUCTION: Foam stability of sparkling wines is significantly favored by the presence of surface active agents such as proteins and polysaccharides [1]. For that reason, the renowned sparkling wines are aged after the second fermentation in contact with the lees for several months (even years). Thereby wines are enriched in these macromolecules due to yeast autolysis. Since this practice is slow and costly, winemakers are seeking for alternative procedures to increase their concentration in base wines. In that sense, the supplementation with inactive yeast during alcoholic fermentation has been proposed [2]. The aim of this study was to determine whether this new strategy is really useful for enriching base wines in macromolecules and for improving foam properties of the base wines.

Non-invasive headspace sorptive extraction for monitoring volatile compounds production by saccharomyces and non-saccharomyces strains throughout alcoholic fermentation

Wine is a solution containing abundant volatile compounds which contribute to their aroma. Many of them are produced by yeast as metabolism by-products. Different yeast strains produce different volatile profiles. The possibility of studying the evolution of volatile compounds during fermentation, using sampling methods that not alter the volume of fermentation media, is of great interest. In spite of this, non-invasive methods to monitoring the evolution of volatile profile during fermentation have been seldom used. The goals of this work were to use by first time the headspace sorptive extraction (HSSE) as non-invasive method to monitor the evolution of volatile profiles throughout alcoholic fermentation and to study the changes on volatile profiles produced by Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Lachancea thermotolerans during fermentation of a must with high sugar content.

Sensory definition of green aroma concept in red French wines. Evidence for the contribution of novel volatile markers

The aromatic complexity of a wine results from the perception of the association of volatile molecules and each aroma can be categorized into different families. The “green” aromas family in red wines has retained our attention by its close link with the fruity perception. In that study, the “green” olfactory concept of red wines was considered through a strategy combining both sensory analysis and hyphenated chromatographic techniques including HPLC and MDGC (Multidimensional Gas Chromatography). The aromatic space of this concept was specified by lexical generation through a free association task on 22 selected wines by a panel of wine experts. Then, 70 French red wines were scored on the basis of the intensity of their “green” and “fruity” attributes.

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].