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

A critical aspect of wine quality from a consumer perspective is the overall impression of wine flavour, which is formed by the interplay of volatile aroma compounds, their precursors, and taste and matrix components. Grapes contribute some potent aroma compounds, together with a large pool of non-volatile precursors (e.g. glycoconjugates and amino acid conjugates). Aroma precursors can break down through chemical hydrolysis reactions, or through the action of yeast or enzymes, significantly changing the aroma profile of a wine during winemaking and storage. In addition, glycoconjugates of monoterpenes, norisoprenoids and volatile phenols, together with sulfur-conjugates in wine, provide a reservoir of additional flavour through the in-mouth release of volatiles which may be perceived retro-nasally.

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.

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.

Yeast cells possess a cell wall comprising primarily glycoproteins, mannans, and glucan polymers. Several yeast phenotypes relevant for fermentation, wine processing, and wine quality are correlated with cell wall properties. To investigate the effect of wine fermentation on cell wall composition, a study was performed using mid-infrared (MIR) spectroscopy coupled with multivariate methods (i.e., PCA and OPLS-DA). A total of 40 yeast strains were evaluated, including Saccharomyces strains (laboratory and industrial) and non-Saccharomyces species. Cells were fermented in both synthetic MS300 and Chardonnay grape must to stationery phase, processed, and scanned in the MIR spectrum.

Most vineyards are grafted and include a variety (Vitis vinifera) grafted over a wild Vitis rootstock (hybrids of V. berlandieri, riparia and rupestris). Grape berry quality at harvest depends on a subtle balance between acidity and the concentrations of sugars, polyphenols and precursors of aroma compounds. The mechanisms controlling the balance of sugars/acids/polyphenols are influenced by the abiotic environment, in particular nitrogen supply, and interact with the genotypes of both the scion variety and the rootstock. Previous work suggests that some of the effects of water stress are in fact linked to a nitrogen deficiency driven indirectly by the reduction of water absorption.