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

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.

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).

Phenolic compounds are secondary metabolites of grapes. Plants produce a wide variety of this type of metabolites through diverse biosynthesis pathways and their production is sometimes a response to external stimuli, either environmental or biotic stresses. Some of them may act as chemical defenses against pathogens or herbivores and their synthesis is increased when the attack exists. However, it is remarkable that the synthesis of these interesting compounds can be activated even when the stimulus is not present, with the use of elicitors. These are substances that when applied exogenously trigger the biosynthetic pathways conducting to the synthesis of these defense compounds.

Chemical and sensory changes occurring in red wine during ageing in oak barrique are due to the slow and gradual entrance of oxygen along with a release of ellagic tannin from the wood. Though oxygen can enter the cask through the bunghole, it is not clear the role of permeation through the wood staves as well as the amount of oxygen entering by permeation. The distribution of the released ellagic tannins in the wine ageing is also unknown. The oxygen passing through the bunghole may have a different wine ageing effect compared to the oxygen permeating through the wooden staves owing to the uneven ellagic tannin concentration throughout the wine.