Merging fast sensory profiling with non-targeted GC-MS analysis for multifactorial experimental wine making

In Enology the conventional processes of filtration for clarification and stabilization are giving place to alternative membrane processes, including nanofiltration (NF). Furthermore, the increased alcohol content in wines recorded in recent years became an important issue for all the main wine producing countries. Among techniques available to the wine industry to reduce the ethanol content, NF is certainly one of the newest. This study is focused on the evaluation of NF influence on wine physical-chemical composition, including mineral content, which in accordance to our best knowledge is a novelty.

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.

Among nitrogen compounds included in white wines, the peptide fraction is certainly the least studied, however this fraction is quantitatively the most important (Feuillat, 1974). Existing studies concern the fraction below 1 kDa and only for white and sparkling wines (Bartolomé et al, 1997, Desportes et al 2000). In this report, we have developed methods to isolate peptides from reference white wines. Then, we have applied this methodology with bitter wine to answer a research question: is there a relation between peptides and the bitterness of white wine as for some cheese for example (Furtado, 1984)?

Bacterial malolactic fermentation (MLF) has a considerable impact on wine quality. The yeast strain used for primary fermentation can consistently stimulate (MLF+ phenotype) or inhibit (MLF- phenotype) malolactic bacteria and the MLF process as a function of numerous winemaking practices, but the molecular evidence behind still remains a mystery. In this study, such evidence was elucidated by the direct comparison of extracellular metabolic profiles of MLF+ and MLF- yeast phenotypes. Untargeted metabolomics combining ultrahigh-resolution FT-ICR-MS analysis, powerful machine learning methods and a comprehensive wine metabolite database, discovered around 800 putative biomarkers and 2500 unknown masses involved in phenotypic distinction.

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].