Monitoring of Pesticide Residues from Vine to Wine

The assessment of red wine mouthfeel relies primarily on the sensory description of its tannic properties. This evaluation could be improved by gaining a better understanding of the physicochemical properties of these tannins. Hence, the objectives of the present study were threefold: (1) to gain an insight into the sensory properties of subpopulations of proanthocyanidic tannins of different molecular sizes obtained through several ultrafiltration steps, (2) to quantify the kinetics of haze formation of these proanthocyanidic tannins in a dynamic polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) precipitation test, (3) to determine whether a correlation exists between the sensory and the precipitation data.

Winemaking decisions and techniques are known to affect the final aromatic composition of red wines. Winemakers put a constant effort into the improved controlling of vinification procedures to achieve better quality. Anyway an increased customer’s demand for uniqueness is often forcing them to adjust and offer new and new interesting products. To support the producers, an improved knowledge on aromatic potential as affected by classical and alternative strategies is needed.

Bacterial malolactic fermentation (MLF) has a considerable impact on wine quality. The yeast strain used for primary fermentation can consistently stimulate (MLF+ phenotype) or inhibit (MLF- phenotype) malolactic bacteria and the MLF process as a function of numerous winemaking practices, but the molecular evidence behind still remains a mystery. In this study, such evidence was elucidated by the direct comparison of extracellular metabolic profiles of MLF+ and MLF- yeast phenotypes. Untargeted metabolomics combining ultrahigh-resolution FT-ICR-MS analysis, powerful machine learning methods and a comprehensive wine metabolite database, discovered around 800 putative biomarkers and 2500 unknown masses involved in phenotypic distinction.

A part, at least, of the fruity aroma of red wines is the consequence of perceptive interactions between various aromatic compounds, particularly ethyl esters and acetates, which may contribute to the perception of fruity aromas, specifically thanks to synergistic effects.1,2 The question of the indirect impact of non-fruity compounds on this particular aromatic expression has not yet been widely investigated. Among these compounds higher alcohols (HA) represent the main group, from a quantitative standpoint, of volatiles in many alcoholic beverages. Moreover, some bibliographic data suggested their contribution to the aromatic complexity by either increasing or masking flavors of wine, depending of their concentrations.

Since 2012, EU Commission approved compulsory labeling of wines treated with allergenic additives or processing aids “if their presence can be detected in the final product” (EU Commission Implementing Regulation No. 579/2012 of 29 June 2012). The list of potential allergens to be indicated on wine labels comprises sulphur dioxide and milk- and egg- derived fining agents, including hen egg lysozyme, which is usually added in wines as preservative. In some non-EU countries, the list includes gluten, tree nuts and fish gelatins. With the exception of lysozyme, all these fining proteins were long thought to be totally removed by subsequent winemaking processings (e.g. bentonite addition).