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…

Microbial life in the grapevine: what can we expect from the leaf microbiome?

The above-ground parts of plants, which constitute the phyllosphere, have long been considered devoid of bacteria and fungi, at least in their internal tissues and microbial presence there was long considered a sign of disease. However, recent studies have shown that plants harbour complex bacterial communities, the so-called “microbiome”[1]. We are only beginning to unravel the origin of these bacterial plant inhabitants, their community structure and their roles, which in analogy to the gut microbiome, are likely to be of essential nature. Among their multifaceted metabolic possibilities, bacteria have been recently demonstrated to emit a wide range of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which can greatly impact the growth and development of both the plant and its disease-causing agents.

What about oxygen transfer during wine aging in barrels?

During wine aging, several complex phenomena of gas transfer take place in barrels due to the wine/oak contact. The efficiency of this gas transfer varies according to oak wood’s intrinsic physical properties. This research aims to better understand oxygen transfer phenomena through dry oak staves and especially through stave gaps, in order to reevaluate the importance of barrel-making on a barrel’s supply of oxygen. Experimentation was based on the development of an innovative permeameter of laboratory scale, for which the principal operating conditions concerning applied pressure, the choice of liquid phase/gas phase, and the grain type of oak are taken into account and investigated. With a specially developed tightening system, the existing pressure at stave gaps in a barrel could be reproduced on a laboratory scale in order to estimate its influence on oxygen transfer efficiency.

Effect of supplementation with inactive yeast during alcoholic fermentation in base wine for sparkling

INTRODUCTION: Foam stability of sparkling wines is significantly favored by the presence of surface active agents such as proteins and polysaccharides [1]. For that reason, the renowned sparkling wines are aged after the second fermentation in contact with the lees for several months (even years). Thereby wines are enriched in these macromolecules due to yeast autolysis. Since this practice is slow and costly, winemakers are seeking for alternative procedures to increase their concentration in base wines. In that sense, the supplementation with inactive yeast during alcoholic fermentation has been proposed [2]. The aim of this study was to determine whether this new strategy is really useful for enriching base wines in macromolecules and for improving foam properties of the base wines.

Modulating role of SO2 in white wine protein haze formation

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].

Impact of elemental sulfur (S0) residues in Sauvignon blanc juice on the formation of the varietal thiols 3-mercapto hexanol and 3-mercaptohexyl acetate

Elemental sulfur is a fungicide used by grape growers to control the development of powdery mildew, caused by the fungus Erysiphe necator. This compound is effective, cheap and has a low toxicity with no withholding period recommended. However, high levels of S0 residues in the harvested grapes can lead to the formation of reductive sulfur compounds that can impart taints and faults to the wine. Hydrogen sulphide (H2S) is a very volatile and unpleasant sulfur compound which formation is connected to high residues of S0 in juice (10 – 100 mg/L).