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…

Spontaneous fermentation dynamics of indigenous yeast populations and their effect on the sensory properties of Riesling

Varietal Riesling aroma relies strongly on the formation and liberation of bound aroma compounds. Floral monoterpenes, green C6-alcohols, fruity C13-norisoprenoids and spicy volatile phenols are predominantly bound to disaccharides, which are produced and stored in the grape berry during berry maturation. Grape processing aims to extract maximum amount of the precursors from the berry skin to increase the potential for a strong varietal aroma in the wine. Subsequent yeast selection plays an important part in this process.

Supramolecular approaches to the study of the astringency elicited by wine phenolic compounds

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.

Analysis of the oenological potentials of different oak forests in Hungary

Like France, Hungary has many oak forests used for making barrels since many years. But if the differences between the woods of the North, the East and the South-West forests of France are well known, this is probably not the case of Hungarian forests. However taking into account the essential differences of climates and soils, differences must be significant and the general name “Hungarian oak” must not have any real meaning. We have studied precisely (determination of concentrations of volatile and non-volatile wood compounds, anatomical criteria, measurement of antioxidant capacity) of oaks collected from northeastern Hungary and others collected from the Danube valley in the northwest of the country.

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).

Use of chitosan as a secondary antioxidant in juices and wines

Chitosan is a polysaccharide produced from the deacetylation of chitin extracted from crustaceous and fungi. In winemaking chitosan is mainly used in the clarification of grape juice and wine, stabilization of white wines, removal of metals and to prevent wine spoilage by undesired microorganisms. The addition of chitosan to model wine systems was able to retard browning, reduce levels of metallic ions (Fe and Cu) and to protect varietal thiols due to its antiradical activity1. The present experiment was planned in order to evaluate the use of chitosan as a secondary antioxidant at three different stages of Sauvignon blanc fermentation and winemaking. Sauvignon blanc juices from three different locations were obtained at a commercial winery in Marlborough, New Zealand. One lots of grapes was collected from a receival bin and pressed into juice with a water-bag press, and a further juice sample was collected from a commercial pressing operation. Chitosan (1 g/L, low molecular weight, 75 – 85% deacetylated) was added to the juice after pressing, after cold settling, after fermentation, or at all these stages. Controls without any chitosan additions were also prepared.