Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Metabolomics of grape polyphenols as a consequence of post-harvest drying: on-plant dehydration vs warehouse withering

Metabolomics of grape polyphenols as a consequence of post-harvest drying: on-plant dehydration vs warehouse withering

Abstract

A method of suspect screening analysis to study grape metabolomics, was developed [1]. By performing ultra-high performance liquid chromatography (UHPLC) – high-resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) analysis of the grape extract, averaging 320-450 putative grape compounds are identified which include mainly polyphenols. Identification of metabolites is performed by a new HRMS-database of putative grape and wine compounds expressly constructed (GrapeMetabolomics) which currently includes around 1,100 entries. Grape dehydration is an oenological process used in the production of a number of non-botrytized sweet and not-sweet Italian wines: e.g., Amarone di Valpolicella (produced by Corvina, Corvinone and Rondinella grapes), Passito di Pantelleria (Zibibbo grape), VinSanto (Malvasia and Trebbiano grapes), Sfursat (Nebbiolo grape), Raboso Passito. The process is carried out by keeping grape on-vine for a certain period of time after cutting the yield cane (up to two/three months), or by leaving the grape in dehydration warehouses under controlled conditions of humidity and temperature [2-6]. Metabolomics of polyphenols of Corvina grape dehydrated both in-plant and warehouse withering was studied by performing UHPLC-QTOF analysis of grape extracts. In particular, the study was focalized on the principal classes of polyphenolic compounds of grape, such as anthocyanins, flavonols and stilbene derivatives [7,8]. Differences between the two dehydration methods were evaluated by statistical analysis.

References 1.Flamini, R.; De Rosso, M.; et al. Metabolomics, 9 (2013), pp 1243-1253. 2.Bellincontro, A.; De Santis, D.; et al. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 84 (2004), pp 1791-1800. 3.Giordano, M.; Rolle, L.; et al. Journal International des Sciences de la Vigne et du Vin, 43 (2009), pp 159-170. 4.Zamboni, A.; Minoia, L.; et al. Journal of Experimental Botany, 59 (2008), pp 4145-4159. 5.Corso, M.; Ziliotto, F.; et al. Plant Science, 208 (2013), pp 50-57. 6.Nicoletti, I.; Bellincontro, A.; et al. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research 19 (2013), pp 358-368. 7.De Rosso, M.; Tonidandel, L.; et al. Food Chemistry, 1635 (2014), pp 244-251. 8. Flamini, R.; De Rosso, et al. J. Anal. Meth. in Chem. (2015), 10 pp.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

Riccardo Flamini*, Antonio Dalla Vedova, Diego Tomasi, Luca Brillante, Mirko De Rosso

*CREA

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Effect of post-harvest ozone treatments on the skin phenolic composition and extractability of red winegrapes cv Nebbiolo and Barbera

Wine industry is looking forward for innovative, safe and eco-friendly antimicrobial products allowing the reduction of chemical treatments in the grape defense and the winemaking process that can affect negatively the quality of the product. Ozone has been tested in food industry giving good results in preventing fungi and bacteria growth on a wide spectrum of vegetables and fruits, due to its oxidant activity and ability to attack numerous cellular constituents. Ozone leaves no chemical residues on the food surface, decomposing itself rapidly in oxygen. Gaseous ozone has been already tested for table grapes storage and on wine grapes during withering.

Testing the effectiveness of Cell-Wall material from grape pomace as fining agent for red wines

Lately several works highlighted the capacity of grape cell-wall material (CWM) to interact with proanthocyanidins (PA), indicating its potential use as fining agent for red wines.1–4 However, those studies were performed by using purified PAs and very high doses of CWM (almost ten-fold higher than those used in wine industry for other commercial fining agents). The present study focuses on the applicability of CWM from Cabernet sauvignon pomace as fining agent for red wines under real winery conditions. Grapes of cultivar Cabernet sauvignon were harvested at three different maturity levels
(unripe, mature, and overripe) and used for red winemaking. The pomace of such vinifications were used as source of CWM, and applied into red wines at two different concentrations: 0.2 g/L and 2.5 g/L.

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.

Chemical markers in wine related to low levels of yeast available nitrogen in the grape

Nitrogen is an important nutrient of yeast and its low content in grape must is a major cause for sluggish fermentations. To prevent problems during fermentation, a supplementation of the must with ammonium salts or more complex nitrogen mixtures is practiced in the cellar. However this correction seems to improve only partially the quality of wine [1]. In fact, yeast is using nitrogen in many of its metabolic pathways and depending of the sort of the nitrogen source (ammonium or amino acids) it produces different flavor active compounds. A limitation in amino acids can lead to a change in the metabolic pathways of yeast and consequently alter wine quality.

Directed Evolution of Oenococcus oeni: optimising yeast-bacteria interactions for improved malolactic fermentation

Malolactic fermentation (MLF) is a secondary step in the vinification process and it follows alcoholic fermentation (AF) which is predominantly carried out by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. These two processes result in the degradation of metabolites to produce secondary metabolites which also contribute to the final wine flavour and quality. AF results in the production of ethanol and carbon dioxide from sugars and MLF stems from the degradation of L-malic acid (a dicarboxylic acid) to L-lactic acid (a monocarboxylic acid). The latter process results in a smoother texture as the acidity of the wine is reduced by the process, it also adds to the flavour complexity of the wine.