Oak wood seasoning: impact on oak wood chemical composition and sensory quality of wine

The use of glutathione (GSH) in winemaking has been legitimated recently, according to OIV resolutions OENO 445-2015 and OENO 446-2015 a maximum dose of 20 mg/L is now allowed to use in must and wine. Several studies have proven the benefits of GSH, predominantly in Sauvignon blanc. Thus, oxidative coloration of must and wine is limited, aroma compounds such as volatile thiols are preserved, and the development of ageing flavors such as sotolon and 2-aminoacetophenone is impeded. The protective effect may be explained by the high affinity of GSH to bind o-quinones which are formed during phenolic oxidation and which are known to initiate browning and other oxidative changes. Some researchers have proposed the hydroxycinnamic acid to GSH ratio (HGR) as an indicator of oxidation susceptibility of must and could show that lower ratios yielded lighter musts.

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.

In red wines the post-MLF SO2 addition is an essential event. It is also the case for the “mutage” during the elaboration of the “liquoreux”. At these moments SO2 plays an antimicrobial action and an antioxidant effect. But at current pH of wines, ensuring a powerful molecular SO2 has become very difficult. Recent work on Brettanomyces strains have also shown that some strains are resistant up to 1.2 mg / L of molecular SO2. It’s also the case of the some Saccharomuces or Zygosaccharomyces strains suitable to re-ferment “liquoreux” wines after the “mutage”.

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].

Among red wines ethyl esters, those from short hydroxylated and branched-chain aliphatic acids constitute a family with a particular behavior and sensory importance. They have been previously discussed in the literature [1] and recent studies have established that some of them were strongly involved in of red wines’ fruity aroma [2]. As some among them have an asymmetrical carbon atom, it seemed important to separate their different enantiomers to obtain an accurate assessment of their organoleptic impact. Three chiral esters have been identified, presenting alkyl and/or hydroxyle substituants: ethyl 2-hydroxy-4-methylpentanoate, ethyl 2-methylbutanoate, and ethyl 3-hydroxybutanoate.