Interactions of wine polyphenols with dead or living Saccharomyces cerevisiae Yeast Cells and Cell Walls: polyphenol location by microscopy

Contribution Sparkling wines elaborated following the traditional method undergo a second fermentation in closed bottles of base wines, followed by aging of wines with lees for at least 9 months. Most of the sparkling wines elaborated are white and rosé ones, although the production of red ones is highly increasing. One of the initial problems in red sparkling wine processing is to obtain suitable base wines that should have moderate alcohol content and astringency and adequate color intensity; which is difficult to obtain when grapes must be harvested at low phenolic and industrial maturity stage. The low phenolic maturity degree in the red grapes makes essential to choose an adequate winemaking methodology to obtain the base wines because the extracted polyphenols will vary according the winemaking technique: carbonic maceration or destemmed-crushed grapes.

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].

Climate change and harvest date decisions have led to the evolution of must quality over the last decades. Increases in must sugar concentrations are among the most obvious consequences, quantitatively. Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a robust and acid tolerant organism. These properties, its sugar to ethanol conversion rate and ethanol tolerance make it the ideal production organism for wine fermentations. Unfortunately, high sugar concentrations may affect S. cerevisiae and lead to growth inhibition or yeast lysis, and cause sluggish or stuck fermentations. Even sublethal conditions cause a hyperosmotic stress response in S. cerevisiae which leads to increased formation of fermentation by-products, including acetic acid, which may exceed legal limits in some wines.

Bentonite fining is widely used to prevent protein haze in white wines. Most wineries use laboratory-scale fining trials to define the appropriate amount of bentonite to be used in the cellar. Those pre-tests need to mimic as much as possible the industrial scale fining procedure to determine the exact amount of bentonite necessary for protein stability. Nevertheless it is frequent that, after fining with the recommended amount of bentonite, wines appear still unstable and need an additional fining treatment. It remains a major challenge to understand why the same wine, fined with the same dosage of the same bentonite, achieves stability in the lab, but not in the cellar.

Oak wood selection and maturation are essential steps in the course of barrel fabrication. Given the existence of many factors involved in the choice of raw material and in natural seasoning of oak wood, it is very difficult to determine the real impact of seasoning and selection factors on oak wood composition. A sampling was done to study the evolution of oak wood chemical composition during four seasoning steps: non matured, 12 months, 18 months and 24 months. For this sampling, three selection factors were taken into account: age, grain type and the Polyphenolic Index measured by Oakscan®. Besides extractables
(~10%), three polymers constitute the main part of oak wood: cellulose, hemicelluloses and lignins.