Effect of ageing with Specific Inactivated Dry Yeasts on the volatile composition of Sauvignon Blanc and Carménère wines

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.

Contribution Foam is the characteristic that differentiates sparkling wines from still wines, being the first sensory attribute that tasters and consumers perceive and that determines the final quality of sparkling wines [1]. The foaming properties mainly depend on the chemical composition of wines [2-3], and different factors involved in wine composition will have an effect on foam quality. In Spain, the sparkling wine market focuses on the production of white and rosé sparkling wine, with very low production of red sparkling wines. However, this type of wines is elaborated in countries like Australia, South-Africa, Argentina, Italy or Portugal, with a great acceptance by consumers. No studies on the foaming characteristics of red sparkling wines have been found.

Those previous years, pesticides are often brought to the forefront by media. Questions arose about their toxicity for growers and consumers. Even if a downward trend is underway, the use of pesticides is required to ensure steady quality and quantity of harvests. A large number of active ingredients are authorized but regarding viticulture, mainly insecticides and fungicides are applied, to control pests and diseases and to increase crop yield. Some phytosanitary products, principally fungicides, applied close to the harvest date may frequently be detected in wines.

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].

Consumers typically prefer wines with floral and fruity aromas over those presenting green-pepper, vegetal or herbaceous notes. Pyrazines have been identified as causatives for herbaceous notes in wines, especially Bordeaux reds. However, pyrazines are not universally responsible for herbaceousness, and several other wine volatile compounds are known to produce distinct vegetal/herbaceous aromas in wines. Specifically, volatile aldehydes elicit sensations of herbaceousness or grassiness and have been described in wines well above their perception thresholds.