Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Non-invasive headspace sorptive extraction for monitoring volatile compounds production by saccharomyces and non-saccharomyces strains throughout alcoholic fermentation

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

Abstract

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. Fermentations were carried out by autochthonous yeast isolated from previous laboratory-scale fermentations with sun-dried Pedro Ximénez must: one Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain and one Lachancea thermotolerans strain. Fermentations were performed at 22 ºC in 500 mL Erlenmeyer flasks containing 350 mL of sun-dried Pedro Ximénez must that were inoculated at a density of approximately 5.5×106 cell/mL. The online sampling was performed by HSSE with PDMS Twisters. Twisters were maintained in the headspace at 2.5 cm above the liquid surface during 2 h at 22 ºC of temperature. A total of six extractions were accomplished for each fermentation assay in the following manner: Before inoculation, every 24 h after inoculation (24, 48 and 72) and at 144 and 192 h after inoculation. A total of 141 volatile compounds throughout fermentations could be monitored by HSSE. 84 of them were positively identified and 28 tentatively identified (TI). The primary difference between the two yeast strains was the different rate of production of ethyl esters. The total content of acetals increased along fermentation. This increase was higher when the process was carried out by S. cerevisiae strain. With respect to acids, the overall balance was an increase of them for wines produced by Saccharomyces strain and a decrease for wines produced by non-Saccharomyces one. An important increase in alcohols was observed, having the same rate of ethanol production both yeasts. However, the global increases of alcohols were significant higher when the fermentation was carried out by non-Saccharomyces strain. The overall content of acetic esters was significant higher for Saccharomyces strain in all the stages.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

M. Lourdes Morales*, J. Fierro-Risco, P. Paneque, Raquel Callejón

*University of Seville

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

New biological tools to control and secure malolactic fermentation in high pH wines

Originally, the role of the malolactic fermentation (MLF) was simply to improve the microbial stability of wine via biological deacidification. However, there is an accumulation of evidence to support the fact that lactic acid bacteria (LAB) also contribute positively to the taste and aroma of wine. Many different LAB enter into grape juice and wine from the surface of grape berries, cluster stems, vine leaves, soil and winery equipment. Due to the highly selective environment of juices and wine, only a few types of LAB are able to grow.

Fining-Derived Allergens in Wine: from Detection to Quantification

Since 2012, EU Commission approved compulsory labeling of wines treated with allergenic additives or processing aids “if their presence can be detected in the final product” (EU Commission Implementing Regulation No. 579/2012 of 29 June 2012). The list of potential allergens to be indicated on wine labels comprises sulphur dioxide and milk- and egg- derived fining agents, including hen egg lysozyme, which is usually added in wines as preservative. In some non-EU countries, the list includes gluten, tree nuts and fish gelatins. With the exception of lysozyme, all these fining proteins were long thought to be totally removed by subsequent winemaking processings (e.g. bentonite addition).

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.

Bentonite fining in cold wines: prediction tests, reduced efficiency and possibilities to avoid additional fining treatments

Bentonite fining is widely used to prevent protein haze in white wines. Most wineries use laboratory-scale fining trials to define the appropriate amount of bentonite to be used in the cellar. Those pre-tests need to mimic as much as possible the industrial scale fining procedure to determine the exact amount of bentonite necessary for protein stability. Nevertheless it is frequent that, after fining with the recommended amount of bentonite, wines appear still unstable and need an additional fining treatment. It remains a major challenge to understand why the same wine, fined with the same dosage of the same bentonite, achieves stability in the lab, but not in the cellar.

On the losses of dissolved CO2 during champagne aging

A misconception lingers in the minds of some wine consumers that Champagne wines don’t age. It’s largely a myth, certainly as far as the best cuvees are concerned. Actually, during the so-called autolysis period of time (in the closed bottle, after the “prise de mousse”), complex chemical reactions take place when the wine remains in contact with the dead yeast cells, which progressively bring complex and very much sought-after aromas to champagne. Nevertheless, despite their remarkable impermeability to liquid and air, caps or natural cork stoppers used to cork the bottles are not 100% hermetic with regard to gas transfers. Gas species therefore very slowly diffuse through the cap or cork stopper, along their respective inverse partial pressure. After the “prise de mousse”, because the partial pressure of CO2 in the bottleneck reaches up to 6 bars (at 12 °C), gaseous CO2 progressively diffuse from the bottle to the ambient air
(where the partial pressure of gaseous CO2 is only of order of 0,0004 bar).