Novel analytical technologies for wine fingerprinting in and beyond the laboratory

Chemical studies aiming at assessing how a wine reacts towards oxidation usually focus on the characterization of wine constituents, such as polyphenols, or oxidation products. As an alternative, the key oxidation intermediate hydrogen peroxide H2O2 has never been quantified, although it plays a pivotal role in wine oxidation. H2O2 is obtained from molecular oxygen as the result of a first cascade of oxidation reactions involving metal ions and polyphenols. The produced H2O2 then reacts in a second cascade of oxidation to produce reactive hydroxyl radicals that can attack almost any chemical substrate in wine.

Sulphur dioxide (SO2) seems indispensable in winemaking because of its properties. However, a current increasing concern about its allergies effects in food product has addressed the international research efforts on its replacement. This supposes a sufficient knowledge of its properties and conditions of use. Several studies compared SO2 properties against new alternatives that are supposed to overcome SO2 disadvantages. Firstly, the state of art on SO2 wine replacements is revised, and secondly, the last promising results using natural enriched polyphenol extracts are shown.

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.

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).

From the standpoint of wine aroma oxidation there are two effects observed: aroma degradation of oxygen sensitive compounds (polyfunctional mercaptans) and the appearance of new substances with high aromatic power (acetaldehyde, methional, phenylacetaldehyde, sotolon, alkenals, isobutanal and 2, 3-metylbutanals) (1-5). According to our experience, Strecker aldehydes are compounds with highest sensory relevance in the oxidative degradation of many wines (5-7).