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

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.

Commercial oenological tannins (TECs) are widely used in the wine industry. TECs are rich in condensed tannins, hydrolyzable tannins or a mixture of both. Wine grapes are a important source of proanthocyanidins or condensed tannins while oak wood possess a high concentration of hydrolyzable tannins (Obreque-Slier et al., 2009). TECs contribute with the antioxidant capacity of wine, catalyze oxide-reduction reactions and participate in the removal of sulfur compounds and metals.

Climate change and harvest date decisions have led to the evolution of must quality over the last decades. Increases in must sugar concentrations are among the most obvious consequences, quantitatively. Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a robust and acid tolerant organism. These properties, its sugar to ethanol conversion rate and ethanol tolerance make it the ideal production organism for wine fermentations. Unfortunately, high sugar concentrations may affect S. cerevisiae and lead to growth inhibition or yeast lysis, and cause sluggish or stuck fermentations. Even sublethal conditions cause a hyperosmotic stress response in S. cerevisiae which leads to increased formation of fermentation by-products, including acetic acid, which may exceed legal limits in some wines.

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].

There is a growing interest in the exploitation of vine-shoots waste, since they are often left or burned. Sánchez-Gómez et al. [1] have shown that vines-shoots aqueous extracts have significant contents of bioactive compounds, among which several polyphenols and volatiles are highlighted. Recent studied had demonstrated that the chemical composition of vine-shoots is enhanced when vine-shoots are toasted
[2,3]. The application of vegetable products in the vineyards has led to significant changes towards a more “Sustainable Viticulture”. An innovative foliar application for Airén vine-shoot extracts have been carried out to the vineyard. It has been shown that they act as grape biostimulants, improving certain wine quality characteristics [4].