Characterization of free and glycosidically bound simple phenols in hybrid grape varieties using liquid chromatography coupled to high resolution mass (q-orbitrap)

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.

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.

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).

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].

Céline Sparrow a, Christophe Morge a, a SOFRALAB SAS, 79, av. A.A. Thévenet – CS 11031 – 51530 Magenta, France Consumers’ health and security force authorities to limit, in wine as in others food industry products, the concentration in « dangerous » molecules. Therefore the legal limit in heavy metals keeps on decreasing. As per proof EU regulation just decrease the stain concentration in wine from 0,2 to 0,15 mg/l. Certain changes , such as sodium arsenite treatment in vines, disappearance of brass in wineries to the benefit of stainless steel, limit even more the concentration of heavy metals in wines. But the use of copper derivates in vines treatments is difficult to replace. In the case of wine and its elaboration, the problem is even more complex. Indeed, regulation forces the wine producers to control the concentration of certain heavy metals in final wines.