Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Interest and impact of PVP/PVI (Polyvinylpyrrolidone/ Polyvinylimidazole) on winemaking and final quality of wines

Interest and impact of PVP/PVI (Polyvinylpyrrolidone/ Polyvinylimidazole) on winemaking and final quality of wines

Abstract

Consumers’ health and security force authorities to limit, in wine as in others food industry products, the concentration in « dangerous » molecules. Therefore the legal limit in heavy metals keeps on decreasing. As per proof EU regulation just decrease the stain concentration in wine from 0,2 to 0,15 mg/l. Certain changes , such as sodium arsenite treatment in vines, disappearance of brass in wineries to the benefit of stainless steel, limit even more the concentration of heavy metals in wines. But the use of copper derivates in vines treatments is difficult to replace. In the case of wine and its elaboration, the problem is even more complex. Indeed, regulation forces the wine producers to control the concentration of certain heavy metals in final wines. But most of the time the measured concentration is largely under legal limit (copper < 1 mg/l) with an average of 0 à 0,2 mg/l of CU, this has the consequence to let consider the wine producers that they have no problem. Unfortunately they are wrong ! This lecture will demonstrate that a major part of musts contain a copper concentration over 0,5 mg/l. The gap between must and wine is majorly do to the alcoholic fermentation that eliminate partially copper. This high concentration has a direct impact on winemaking and final wines quality. Copper is a known antiseptic, and it can have some toxic effects on micro-organisms (this effect is strain / species dependant). This leads to fermentations problems from slugglish to suck AF or difficult MLF. In addition heavy metals have an impact that can cause over 50% of “destruction” of certain aromatic compounds of grapes such as free thiols. Copper is also taking an active part in oxidation mechanisms that forms quinones and conduct to an increase of yellow length in wines colour. It increases bitterness of wines and also limit SO2 action ( copper is trapping free fraction). As for conclude this lecture will demonstrate the interest and impact PVP/PVI (only or in formulation) during winemaking as a solution to heavy metal presence such as copper. 

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

Christophe Morge*, Céline Sparrow

*SOFRALAB

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Pesticide removal in wine with a physical treatment by molecular sieving

All along the winemaking process, conditioning and aging, wine is susceptible to be contaminated by different molecules. Contaminations can have various origins, related to wine microorganisms or as a result of an exogenous contamination. The aforementioned contamination of the wine can be caused by the migration of molecules from the materials in contact with the wine or by a contamination from exogenous molecules present in the air. Regardless of the source of the contamination, mainly two types of consequences can be observed.

Impact of smoke exposure on the chemical composition of grapes

Vineyard exposure to smoke can lead to grapes and wine which exhibit objectionable smoky and ashy aromas and flavours, more commonly known as ‘smoke taint’ [1, 2]. In the last decade, significant bushfires have occurred around the world, including near wine regions in Australia, Canada, South Africa and the USA, as a consequence of the warmer, drier conditions associated with climate change. Considerable research has subsequently been undertaken to determine the chemical, sensory and physiological consequences of grapevine exposure to smoke. The sensory attributes associated with smoke-tainted wine have been linked to the presence of several smoke-derived volatile phenols, such as guaiacols, syringols and cresols [2].

Anti/prooxidant activity of wine polyphenols in reactions of adrenaline auto-oxidation

Adrenaline (epinephrine) belongs to catecholamine class. It is a neurotransmitter and both a hormone which is released by the sympathetic nervous system and adrenal medulla in response to a range of stresses in order to regulate blood pressure, cardiac stimulation, relaxation of smooth muscles and other physiological processes. Adrenaline exhibits an effective antioxidant capacity (1). However, adrenalin is capable to auto-oxidation and in this case it generates toxic reactive oxygen intermediates and adrenochrome. Under in vitro conditions, auto-oxidation of adrenaline occurs in an alkaline medium (2).

Effect of malolactic fermentation in barrels or stainless steel tanks on wine composition. Influence of the barrel toasting

Ellagitannin, anthocyanin and woody volatile composition of Cabernet Sauvignon wines aged in oak barrels for 12 months was evaluated. Depending on the container where malolactic fermentation (MLF) was carried out, two wine modalities were investigated: wines with MLF carried out in stainless steel tanks and barrel-fermented wines. Three toasting methods (medium toast, MT; medium toast with watering, MTAA; noisette) were considered for ageing of each wine modality. Sensory analyses (triangle and rating tests) were also performed. Two-way ANOVA of the raw experimental data revealed that the toasting method and the container where MLF took place, as well as the interaction between both factors, have a significant influence (p < 0.05) on ellagitannin, anthocyanin and woody volatile profiles of Cabernet Sauvignon wines.

Removal of Fumonisin B1 and B2 from red wine using polymeric substances

The Ability of PVPP (Polyvinylpolypyrrolidone), PVP-DEGMA-TAIC (copolimerization of N-vinyl-2-pyrrolidinone with ethylene glycol dimethacrylate and triallyl isocyanurate) and PAEGDMA
(poly(acrylamide-co-ethylene glycol dimethacrylate)) polymers was tested as removal agents for Fumonisin B1 (FB1) and Fumonisin B2 (FB2) from model solutions and red wine. The polymers removal capacity was checked at three different resident times (2, 8 and 24 hours of contact time between the polymer and the sample), showing no differences in the percentage of FB1 and FB2 removal. Then, different polymer concentrations (1, 5 and 10 mg mL-1) were tested in model solution with and without phenolics (i.e. gallic acid and 4-methylcatechol).