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…

Novel contribution to the study of mouth-feel properties in wines

In general, there is a well-established lexicon related to wine aroma and taste properties; however mouth-feel-related vocabulary usually includes heterogeneous, multimodal and personalized terms. Gawel et al.
(2000) published a wheel related to mouthfeel properties of red wine. However, its use in scientific publications has been limited. The authors accepted that the approach had certain limitations as it included redundant and terms with hedonic tone and some others were absent. It is of high interest to generate a mouth-feel lexicon and finding the chemical compound or group of compounds responsible for such properties in red wine. In the present work a chemical fractionation method has been developed.

Influence of inactive dry yeast treatments during grape ripening on postharvest berry skin texture parameters and phenolic compounds extractability

Inactive dry yeast treatments in the vineyard are a tool used with the aim to improve the concentration and quality of secondary metabolites in grapes, leading to a better differentiation of the wines made from grapes differently treated. In this work, a foliar spraying treatment with yeast derivatives specifically designed to be used with the patent pending application technology of Lallemand Inc. Canada (LalVigne® Mature, Lallemand Inc., Montreal, Canada) was tested on Vitis vinifera L. cv. Barbera and Nebbiolo black winegrapes. The aim was to evaluate the effect of this treatment on the phenolic compounds accumulation, the skin physical-mechanical properties and the related phenolic extractability. Prior to analysis, the berries were sorted by flotation in order to evaluate their distribution by density class, and to determine the skin texture parameters of berries with different sugar contents, thus understanding also the ripening effect.

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.

Assessing the effect of oak derived aromas on mouthfeel perception in Chardonnay wine

Mouthfeel is an important quality parameter for Chardonnay wines, particularly those aged in oak. While research on mouthfeel has traditionally focused on the impact of non-aromatic compounds, the role of aroma compounds has largely been over looked. However, in wine as well as other food interactions between retronasal aroma and mouthfeel have been noted. The goal of this research was to investigate the impact of wine aroma on the perception of mouthfeel. Because of the importance of oak aging in the development of Chardonnay mouthfeel, the impact of oak aromas on perceived mouthfeel was explored. Aroma compounds associated with oak (ethyl palmitate, eugenol, furfural, isoeugenol, syringaldehyde, vanillin and whiskey lactone) were added to two different Chardonnay wines; one with no oak influence and one fermented in neutral oak. Low and high concentrations of the compounds were added based on concentrations typically found in barrel aged Chardonnay 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.