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…

Maturation of Agiorgitiko (Vitis vinifera) red wine on its wine lees: Impact on its phenolic composition

Maturation of wine on lees (often referred as sur lie) is a common practice applied by many winemakers around the world. In the past this method was applied mainly on white and/or sparkling wine production but recently also to red wine production. In our experiment, we matured red wine on wine lees of two origins: a) Light wine lees, collected after the completion of the alcoholic fermentation, b) Heavy lees, collected after the completion of the malolactic fermentation. The lees were free of off-odors and were added in the red wine in percentage 3% and 8%, simulating common winemaking addition. The maturation lasted in total six months and samples were collected for analysis after one, three and six months. During storage the lees were stirred.

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.

Update knowledge about the presence of condensed tannins in grapes and their contributions to astringency perception

Condensed tannin is a principle group of polyphenol compounds derived from grape, greatly contributing to the bioactivity and the sensory perception of wine. Condensed tannins present as a heterogeneous mixture in nature involving various degrees of both polymerization and galloylation. Even though multiple attempts focusing on fractionation of grape condensed tannins by solid-phase have been conducted over the past decades, few individual tannins have been purified and identified. Hence, our knowledge on grape and wine condensed tannin moleculars has to be limited at the several known monomeric, dimeric and trimeric proanthocyanidins

Novel analytical technologies for wine fingerprinting in and beyond the laboratory

For characterization, sensory designing and authentication rapid analytical technologies have become available. Some, like Proton Transfer Reaction Mass Spectrometry allow a rapid spectrum of the volatile compounds of wines. Combined with chemometrics wines can be characterized. The same approach can be used to calculate the results of virtual mixtures and allow formulation of constant quality blends. Other new techniques and portable devices based on spectroscopy allow measurements on production sites and in grocery stores, even for the smart consumer. We will present some examples of the application of these techniques for authentication of wines, both in the laboratory and on site.

New molecular evidence of wine yeast-bacteria interaction unraveled by untargeted metabolomic profiling

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.