Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Fining-Derived Allergens in Wine: from Detection to Quantification

Fining-Derived Allergens in Wine: from Detection to Quantification

Abstract

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). Suitable methods to detect and quantify potential residual allergens are necessary to ensure compliance with legislation. ELISA kits are routinely used to ensure the absence of allergenic proteins in wines, since they are easy to perform. The required LOD and LOQ for milk and egg products with ELISA methods are 0.25 ppm and 0.5 ppm (OIV Comex 502- 2012). In a recent paper (1), no detectable egg white protein residue was found in red wines by ELISA, even when coadiuvant was added at 660 ppm, without following bentonite treatment. In 2011, a clinical survey (2) reported that, although no allergen residue was detected by ELISA kits in the fined wines, positive skin prick test reactions and basophil activation to the treated wines were observed in the majority of patients with allergy to milk, egg or fish, correlating with the concentration of the fining agents used. From these findings, some uncentainty about the safety of wines certified as “allergen-free” through ELISA methods can exist. More recently, mass spectrometry have been proposed, mainly as a confirmatory method of results from ELISA. The two main drawbacks for MS-based methods, especially in the past, were insufficient LOD and LOQ, and high costs. At present, some methods with competitive performance and linearity have been set up for milk and egg protein based fining aids. Aim of the present presentation is to review the different approaches in the detection of allergenic residues in wines, including recent metrological approaches, and development of innovative biosensors. Preliminary data on MS-based method that is currently being developed in our laboratory will be presented, as well future perspectives on the topic and possible implications for consumers health, safety and ethical preferences.

1- Uberti F., et al. Immunochemical investigation of allergenic residues in experimental and commercially-available wines fined with egg white proteins. Food Chem. 2014;159:343-52. 2- Vassilopoulou E., et al. Risk of allergic reactions to wine, in milk, egg and fish-allergic patients. Clin Transl Allergy. 2011;1:10.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

Maria Gabriella Giuffrida*, Cristina Lamberti, Daniela Gastaldi, Laura Cavallarin, Marzia Giribaldi

*ISPA

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Development and validation of a standardized oxidation assay for the accurate measurement of the ability of different wines to form “de novo” oxidation-related aldehydes

From the standpoint of wine aroma oxidation there are two effects observed: aroma degradation of oxygen sensitive compounds (polyfunctional mercaptans) and the appearance of new substances with high aromatic power (acetaldehyde, methional, phenylacetaldehyde, sotolon, alkenals, isobutanal and 2, 3-metylbutanals) (1-5). According to our experience, Strecker aldehydes are compounds with highest sensory relevance in the oxidative degradation of many wines (5-7).

A combination of biotechnology tools and coopers elements for an alternative the addition of SO2 at the end of the malolactic fermentation in red wines or at the “mutage” for the “liquoreux” wines

In red wines the post-MLF SO2 addition is an essential event. It is also the case for the “mutage” during the elaboration of the “liquoreux”. At these moments SO2 plays an antimicrobial action and an antioxidant effect. But at current pH of wines, ensuring a powerful molecular SO2 has become very difficult. Recent work on Brettanomyces strains have also shown that some strains are resistant up to 1.2 mg / L of molecular SO2. It’s also the case of the some Saccharomuces or Zygosaccharomyces strains suitable to re-ferment “liquoreux” wines after the “mutage”.

Influence of toasting oak wood on ellagitannin structures

Ellagitannins (ETs) have been reported to be the main phenolic compounds found in oak wood. These compounds, belonging to the hydrolysable tannin class of polyphenols, are esters of hexahydroxydiphenic acid (HHDP) and a polyol, usually glucose or quinic acid. They own their name to their capacity to be hydrolysed and liberate ellagic acid and they have an impact on astringency and bitterness sensation, which is strongly dependant on their structure. The toasting phase is particularly crucial in barrels fabrication and influences wood composition.

Cover crops influence on soil N availability and grapevine N status, and its relationship with biogenic

The type of soil management, tillage versus cover crops, can modify the soil microbial activity, which causes the mineralization of organic N to NO3–N and, therefore, may change the soil NO3–N availability in vineyard. The soil NO3–N availability could influence the grapevine nutritional status and the grape amino acid composition. Amino acids are precursors of biogenic amines, compounds mainly formed during the malolactic fermentation. Biogenic amines have negative effects on consumer health and on the wine organoleptic quality. The objective was to study if the effect of conventional tillage and two different cover crops (leguminous versus gramineous) on grapevine N status, could relate to the wine biogenic amines composition.

Impact of non-fruity compounds on red wines fruity aromatic expression: the role of higher alcohols

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.