Study of the colour and phenolic evolution of three different tannin/anthocyanin ratios over time in a model wine

Phenolic compounds are very important in crop plants and have been the subject of a large number of studies. Three main reasons can be cited for optimizing the level of phenolic compounds in crop plants: their physiological role in plants, their technological significance for food processing, and their nutritional characteristics1 Indeed, an enormous diversity of phenolic antioxidants is found in fruits and vegetables, and their presence and roles can be affected or modified by several pre- and postharvest cultural practices and/or food processing technologies (Ruiz-García et al. 2012, Goldman et al. 1999, Tudela et al. 2002). In winegrapes, the technological importance of phenolic compounds, mainly flavonoids, is well-known.

Mouthfeel is an important quality parameter for Chardonnay wines, particularly those aged in oak. While research on mouthfeel has traditionally focused on the impact of non-aromatic compounds, the role of aroma compounds has largely been over looked. However, in wine as well as other food interactions between retronasal aroma and mouthfeel have been noted. The goal of this research was to investigate the impact of wine aroma on the perception of mouthfeel. Because of the importance of oak aging in the development of Chardonnay mouthfeel, the impact of oak aromas on perceived mouthfeel was explored. Aroma compounds associated with oak (ethyl palmitate, eugenol, furfural, isoeugenol, syringaldehyde, vanillin and whiskey lactone) were added to two different Chardonnay wines; one with no oak influence and one fermented in neutral oak. Low and high concentrations of the compounds were added based on concentrations typically found in barrel aged Chardonnay wine.

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).

The use of bentonite in oenology rounds around the limpidity and the stability that determine consumer acceptability. As a matter of fact, the haze formation in wine reduces its commercial value and makes it unacceptable for sale. Stabilization treatments are, therefore, essential to ensure a long-time limpidity and to forecast the formation of deposits in the bottle. Bentonite that is normally used in oenology for clarifying-fining purpose, shows a natural clay-based mineral structure allowing it to swell and to jelly in water and hence in must and wine.

Vineyard exposure to smoke can lead to grapes and wine which exhibit objectionable smoky and ashy aromas and flavours, more commonly known as ‘smoke taint’ [1, 2]. In the last decade, significant bushfires have occurred around the world, including near wine regions in Australia, Canada, South Africa and the USA, as a consequence of the warmer, drier conditions associated with climate change. Considerable research has subsequently been undertaken to determine the chemical, sensory and physiological consequences of grapevine exposure to smoke. The sensory attributes associated with smoke-tainted wine have been linked to the presence of several smoke-derived volatile phenols, such as guaiacols, syringols and cresols [2].