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

Proteins constitute one of the three main components of grape juice and white wine, phenolic compounds and polysaccharides being the others. A specific group of the total grape-derived proteins resists degradation or adsorption during the winemaking process and remains in finished wine if not removed by the commonplace commercial practice of bentonite fining. While bentonite is effective in removing the problematic proteins, it is claimed to adversely affect the quality of the treated wine under certain conditions, through the removal of colour, flavor and texture compounds. A number of studies have indicated that different protein fractions require distinct bentonite concentrations for protein removal and consequent heat stabilization.

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].

Phenolic compounds are secondary metabolites of grapes. Plants produce a wide variety of this type of metabolites through diverse biosynthesis pathways and their production is sometimes a response to external stimuli, either environmental or biotic stresses. Some of them may act as chemical defenses against pathogens or herbivores and their synthesis is increased when the attack exists. However, it is remarkable that the synthesis of these interesting compounds can be activated even when the stimulus is not present, with the use of elicitors. These are substances that when applied exogenously trigger the biosynthetic pathways conducting to the synthesis of these defense compounds.

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).

1,1,6-trimethyl-1,2-dihydronaphtelene (TDN) evokes the odor of “petrol” in wine, especially in the variety Riesling. Increasing UV-radiation due to climate change intensifies formation of carotenoids in the berry skins and an increase of TDN-precursors1. Exploring new viticultural and oenological strategies to limit TDN formation in the future requires precise knowledge of TDN thresholds in different matrices. Thresholds reported in the literature vary substantially between 2 µg/L up to 20 µg/L2,3,4 due to the use of different methods. As Riesling grapes are used for very different wine styles such as dry, sweet or sparkling wines, it is essential to study the impact of varying ethanol and carbonation levels.