Anthropogenic factors in modulations of fungal populations from grapes to wines and their repercussions on wine characteristics

Leaf removal in the bunch zone is a common viticultural practice with several objectives, yet it has been difficult to conclusively link the physiological mechanism(s) and metabolic berry impact to this widely practiced treatment. We used a field-omics approach1 in a Sauvignon blanc high altitude model vineyard, showing that the early leaf removal in the bunch zone caused quantifiable and stable responses (over years) in the microclimate where the main perturbation was increased exposure. We provide an explanation for how leaf removal leads to the shifts in grape metabolites typically linked to this treatment and confirm anecdotal evidence and previous reports that leaf removal treatment at an early stage of berry development affects “quality-associated” metabolites (monoterpenes and norisoprenoids).

The objective of this study is to review the scientific evidences and to advance into the knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of astringency. Astringency has been described as the drying, roughing and puckering sensation perceived when some food and beverages are tasted (1). The main, but possibly not the only, mechanism for the astringency is the precipitation of salivary proteins (2,3). Between phenolic compounds found in red wines, flavan-3-ols are the group usually related to the development of this sensation. Other compounds, phenolic or not, like anthocyanins, polysaccharides and mannoproteins could act modifying or modulating astringency perception by hindering the interaction between flavanols and salivary proteins either because of their interaction with the flavanols or because of their interaction with the salivary proteins.

The use of multivariate statistics to correlate chemical data to spectral information seems as a valid alternative for the quantification of red wine phenolics. The advantages of these techniques include simplicity and cost effectiveness together with the limited time of analysis required. Although many
publications on this subject are nowadays available in the literature most of them only reported feasibility
studies. In this study 400 samples from thirteen fermentations including five different cultivars plus 150
wine samples from a varying number of vintages were submitted to spectrophotometric and chromatographic phenolic analysis.

A misconception lingers in the minds of some wine consumers that Champagne wines don’t age. It’s largely a myth, certainly as far as the best cuvees are concerned. Actually, during the so-called autolysis period of time (in the closed bottle, after the “prise de mousse”), complex chemical reactions take place when the wine remains in contact with the dead yeast cells, which progressively bring complex and very much sought-after aromas to champagne. Nevertheless, despite their remarkable impermeability to liquid and air, caps or natural cork stoppers used to cork the bottles are not 100% hermetic with regard to gas transfers. Gas species therefore very slowly diffuse through the cap or cork stopper, along their respective inverse partial pressure. After the “prise de mousse”, because the partial pressure of CO2 in the bottleneck reaches up to 6 bars (at 12 °C), gaseous CO2 progressively diffuse from the bottle to the ambient air
(where the partial pressure of gaseous CO2 is only of order of 0,0004 bar).

Those previous years, pesticides are often brought to the forefront by media. Questions arose about their toxicity for growers and consumers. Even if a downward trend is underway, the use of pesticides is required to ensure steady quality and quantity of harvests. A large number of active ingredients are authorized but regarding viticulture, mainly insecticides and fungicides are applied, to control pests and diseases and to increase crop yield. Some phytosanitary products, principally fungicides, applied close to the harvest date may frequently be detected in wines.