Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Impact of glutathione and elemental sulphur juice addition on the volatile thiol production in South African Sauvignon blanc wine

Impact of glutathione and elemental sulphur juice addition on the volatile thiol production in South African Sauvignon blanc wine

Abstract

Volatile thiols play an important role in Sauvignon blanc wines worldwide, they can have either positive or negative organoleptic properties. Three compounds, 3-mercaptohexanol (3MH), 3-mercaptohexyl-acetate (3MHA) and 4-mercapto-4-methylpentan-2-one (4MMP), also known as varietal thiols, have been identified to contribute positively to wine aroma and are responsible for the distinct gooseberry, grapefruit, guava and box tree character found in Sauvignon blanc wines. Certain volatile thiol compounds though, can cause off-aromas of onion, garlic, rubber and rotten egg, this group of molecules is known as reductive sulphur compounds (RSC). This study looks into how the addition of sulphur-compounds to Sauvignon blanc juice contributes to the varietal thiol (3MH and 3MHA) concentration and reductive sulphur compound concentration in South African Sauvignon blanc wine. Glutathione (GSH) and elemental sulphur were tested in two different Sauvignon blanc juices. The compounds were added to the juices in two different concentrations (1.5 and 3mg/L elemental sulphur equivalent) before yeast inoculation. The standard winemaking protocol was followed and after fermentation the varietal thiols as well as the reductive sulphur compounds were tested. The addition of GSH and elemental sulphur did not have an influence on the production of varietal thiols. Some differences were seen for the reductive sulphur compounds, but these cannot be explained by the addition of either GSH or elemental sulphur. This study shows that the addition of glutathione to Sauvignon blanc juice did not influence the production of varietal thiols nor did it contribute to the production of reductive sulphur compounds under our conditions.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

Sebastian Vannevel*, Astrid Buica, Bruno Fedrizzi, Mandy Herbst-Johnstone, Wessel du Toit

*Stellenbosch University

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

The impact of different yeasts and harvest time on the wine quality of Beihong and Beimei (<I>V. vinifera x V. amurensis</I>)

Beihong and Beimei are two wine cultivars from ‘Muscat Hamberg’ (V. vinifera L.) and wild V. amurensis Rupr., which were released in China in 2008. Here,two enology practices were reported. Firstly, the impact of different yeasts including D254, GRE, K1, D21 and BDX on dry wine quality of Beihong and Beimei was investigated. For Beihong, among wines fermented by all yeasts, residual sugar content was the lowest, total anthocyanin and resveratrol contents were the highest in the wine by D254. However, the wine by D254 had lower titrable acid than those by the other yeasts except BDX.

Using combinations of recombinant pectinases to elucidate the deconstruction of the polysaccharide‐rich grape cell wall during winemaking

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.

Metabolomics comparison of non-Saccharomyces yeasts in Sauvignon blanc and Shiraz

Saccharomyces cerevisiae (SC) is the main driver of alcoholic fermentation however, in wine, non-Saccharomyces species can have a powerful effect on aroma and flavor formation. This study aimed to compare untargeted volatile compound profiles from SPME-GC×GC-TOF-MS of Sauvignon blanc and Shiraz wine inoculated with six different non-Saccharomyces yeasts followed by SC. Torulaspora delbrueckii (TD), Lachancea thermotolerans (LT), Pichia kluyveri (PK) and Metschnikowia pulcherrima (MP) were commercial starter strains, while Candida zemplinina (CZ) and Kazachstania aerobia (KA), were isolated from wine grape environments. Each fermentation produced a distinct chemical profile that was unique for both grape musts. The SC-monoculture and CZ-SC sequential fermentations were the most distinctly different in the Sauvignon blanc while the LT-SC sequential fermentations were the most different from the control in the Shiraz fermentations.

Characterization of non-Saccharomyces yeast and its interaction with Saccharomyces cerevisiae with investigation of fermentation kinetics and aromatic composition

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.20.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

Anti/prooxidant activity of wine polyphenols in reactions of adrenaline auto-oxidation

Adrenaline (epinephrine) belongs to catecholamine class. It is a neurotransmitter and both a hormone which is released by the sympathetic nervous system and adrenal medulla in response to a range of stresses in order to regulate blood pressure, cardiac stimulation, relaxation of smooth muscles and other physiological processes. Adrenaline exhibits an effective antioxidant capacity (1). However, adrenalin is capable to auto-oxidation and in this case it generates toxic reactive oxygen intermediates and adrenochrome. Under in vitro conditions, auto-oxidation of adrenaline occurs in an alkaline medium (2).