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…

Fractionation of copper and iron in wine: Assessment of potential macromolecule and sulfur binding agents

Copper and iron are known to substantially impact wine stability through oxidative, reductive or colloidal phenomena. However, the binding of metal ions to different wine components under wine conditions, and the impact of this binding on the ability of the metal ions to induce spoilage processes, is not well understood. This study surveyed a range of red and white wines for an understanding of the variability of broad metal categories within the wines. The techniques utilized included an electrochemical constant current stripping potentiometry technique (ccSP), and solid phase extraction (SPE) fractionation of wine with subsequent analysis of the metal content of each fraction by inductively coupled plasma – optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES).

The commercial yeast strain as a significant source of variance for tyrosol and hydroxytyrosol in white wine

Tyrosol (TYR) and hydroxytyrosol (HYT) are bioactive phenols present in olive oil and wine, basic elements of the Mediterranean diet. TYR is reported in the literature for its interesting antioxidant, cardioprotective and anti-inflammatory properties. In wine, its concentration can reach values as high as about 40 mg/L
[Pour Nikfardjam et al. 2007] but, more frequently, this phenol – derived from yeast metabolism of tyrosine during fermentation – is present at lower levels, generally higher in red wines compared to whites. HYT was measured for the first time by Di Tommaso et al. [1998] in Italian wines – with maximum values of 4.20 mg/L and 1.92 mg/L for red and white wines, respectively – while definitely lower concentrations have been found later in Greek samples.

Non-invasive headspace sorptive extraction for monitoring volatile compounds production by saccharomyces and non-saccharomyces strains throughout alcoholic fermentation

Wine is a solution containing abundant volatile compounds which contribute to their aroma. Many of them are produced by yeast as metabolism by-products. Different yeast strains produce different volatile profiles. The possibility of studying the evolution of volatile compounds during fermentation, using sampling methods that not alter the volume of fermentation media, is of great interest. In spite of this, non-invasive methods to monitoring the evolution of volatile profile during fermentation have been seldom used. The goals of this work were to use by first time the headspace sorptive extraction (HSSE) as non-invasive method to monitor the evolution of volatile profiles throughout alcoholic fermentation and to study the changes on volatile profiles produced by Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Lachancea thermotolerans during fermentation of a must with high sugar content.

Metabolomics comparison of non-Saccharomyces yeasts in Sauvignon blanc and Shiraz

Saccharomyces cerevisiae (SC) is the main driver of alcoholic fermentation however, in wine, non-Saccharomyces species can have a powerful effect on aroma and flavor formation. This study aimed to compare untargeted volatile compound profiles from SPME-GC×GC-TOF-MS of Sauvignon blanc and Shiraz wine inoculated with six different non-Saccharomyces yeasts followed by SC. Torulaspora delbrueckii (TD), Lachancea thermotolerans (LT), Pichia kluyveri (PK) and Metschnikowia pulcherrima (MP) were commercial starter strains, while Candida zemplinina (CZ) and Kazachstania aerobia (KA), were isolated from wine grape environments. Each fermentation produced a distinct chemical profile that was unique for both grape musts. The SC-monoculture and CZ-SC sequential fermentations were the most distinctly different in the Sauvignon blanc while the LT-SC sequential fermentations were the most different from the control in the Shiraz fermentations.

Impact of elemental sulfur (S0) residues in Sauvignon blanc juice on the formation of the varietal thiols 3-mercapto hexanol and 3-mercaptohexyl acetate

Elemental sulfur is a fungicide used by grape growers to control the development of powdery mildew, caused by the fungus Erysiphe necator. This compound is effective, cheap and has a low toxicity with no withholding period recommended. However, high levels of S0 residues in the harvested grapes can lead to the formation of reductive sulfur compounds that can impart taints and faults to the wine. Hydrogen sulphide (H2S) is a very volatile and unpleasant sulfur compound which formation is connected to high residues of S0 in juice (10 – 100 mg/L).