Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Novel contribution to the study of mouth-feel properties in wines

Novel contribution to the study of mouth-feel properties in wines

Abstract

In general, there is a well-established lexicon related to wine aroma and taste properties; however mouth-feel-related vocabulary usually includes heterogeneous, multimodal and personalized terms. Gawel et al.
(2000) published a wheel related to mouthfeel properties of red wine. However, its use in scientific publications has been limited. The authors accepted that the approach had certain limitations as it included redundant and terms with hedonic tone and some others were absent. It is of high interest to generate a mouth-feel lexicon and finding the chemical compound or group of compounds responsible for such properties in red wine. In the present work a chemical fractionation method has been developed. Six odorless wine fractions containing groups of compounds with different sensory and chemical properties were isolated. Eighteen fractions (6 fractions x 3 wines) were firstly classified in groups attending to their in-mouth similarities and groups were described (labelled sorting task) by a panel of experts. This task allowed identifying 14 fractions with different in-mouth properties. These odorless fractions were further submitted to a task of vocabulary generation (repertory grid). Terms generated in both sorting task and repertory grid were combined to form categories through a triangulation process. The final list of 23 terms (4 related to taste and 18 to mouth-feel) was employed for the sensory characterization of the 14 fractions by Rate-all-that-apply method with 30 wine experts. ANOVA analyses calculated on the 23 attributes showed significant effects for 20 of them, which confirmed the discrimination ability of the terms and sensory differences among fractions. Further PCA analysis followed by cluster analysis showed 5 groups of fractions with different in-mouth properties: cluster 1 (5 fractions) characterized with terms: sweet, watery, silky, fleshy, oily and greasy; cluster 2 (4 fractions): burning, hot and bitter; cluster 3 (3 fractions): dry, coarse and granular; cluster 4 (1 fraction): dusty and 5 (1 fraction) bitter, sour, puckering, persistent and sharp.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Article

Authors

Purificación Fernández-Zurba*, Dominique Valentin, Jose Avizcuri, Maria Pilar Saenz-Navaja, Vicente Ferreira

*Universidad de La Rioja

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Directed Evolution of Oenococcus oeni: optimising yeast-bacteria interactions for improved malolactic fermentation

Malolactic fermentation (MLF) is a secondary step in the vinification process and it follows alcoholic fermentation (AF) which is predominantly carried out by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. These two processes result in the degradation of metabolites to produce secondary metabolites which also contribute to the final wine flavour and quality. AF results in the production of ethanol and carbon dioxide from sugars and MLF stems from the degradation of L-malic acid (a dicarboxylic acid) to L-lactic acid (a monocarboxylic acid). The latter process results in a smoother texture as the acidity of the wine is reduced by the process, it also adds to the flavour complexity of the wine.

Ripening of cv. Cabernet Sauvignon grapes: polysaccharides fractions evolution and phenolic extractability

Polysaccharides and more specifically pectins, make up a significant portion of the cell wall material of the plant cells including the grapes. During the fruit ripening the associated softening is related to the breakdown of the cell wall polysaccharides. During this process, it is expected that polysaccharides that are soluble in red wine will be formed influencing its texture. Anthocyanins are responsible for the wine color and tannins for the astringency, body and bitterness of the wine. In the skins, these compounds are located in the cell vacuoles and the barrier that conditions their extractability is the skin cell wall that may determine the mechanical resistance, the texture and the ease of processing berries. The aim of this work was study the evolution of the polysaccharides and the anthocyanin and tannin extractability during the ripening period in Cabernet Sauvignon grapes, trying to correlate these variables.

Assessing the effect of oak derived aromas on mouthfeel perception in Chardonnay wine

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.

Correlations between sensory characteristics and colloidal content in dry white wines

Must clarification is an important step occurring just after grape extraction in the elaboration of white wine, consisting in a solid-liquid separation. Traditionally, low must turbidity, around 50-150 NTU, is generally reached in white winemaking in order to prevent reductive aromas and facilitating alcoholic fermentation. Alternatively, a higher turbidity (300 NTU or above) can be sought for reasons such as a better expression of grapes identity (terroir), or for getting a must matrix that could supposedly lead to wines having greater ageing potential.

Fining-Derived Allergens in Wine: from Detection to Quantification

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).