South Africa’s top 10 Sauvignon blanc wines. How do the chemical and sensory profiles compare?

Colour is an important quality parameter in wines and is the result of a complex mixture of pigments
(including anthocyanins and their derivatives, quinones, xanthyllium compounds, etc.). Red wine colour changes over time as pigments react between themselves and with other wine macromolecules
(particularly polyphenols). During wine tasting, colour is normally assessed on the outer rim of the wine profile in a tilted glass, since most wines are too opaque to be analysed in the middle of the glass. Therefore, depending on the depth of observation considered, the perception of wine colour can be different.

Despite the extensive research performed during the last decades, the multifactorial mechanism responsible for the white wine protein haze formation is not fully characterized. Herein, a new model is proposed, which is based on the experimental identification of sulfur dioxide as a major modulating factor inducing wine protein haze upon heating. As opposed to other reducing agents, such as 2-mercaptoethanol, dithiothreitol and tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine hydrochloride (TCEP), the addition of SO2 to must/wine upon heating cleaves intraprotein disulfide bonds, hinders thiol-disulfide exchange during protein interactions and can lead to the formation of novel inter/intraprotein disulfide bonds. Those are eventually responsible for wine protein aggregation which follows a nucleation-growth kinetic model as shown by dynamic light scattering [1].

“The Human being has an excellent ability to detect and discriminate odors but typically has great difficulty in identifying specific odorants”(1). Furthermore, “from a cognitive point of view the mechanism used to judge wines is closer to pattern recognition than descriptive analysis.” Therefore, when one wants to reveal the volatile “wine-like feature” pattern recognition techniques are required. Sensomics is one of the most recent “omics”, i.e. a holistic perspective of a complex system, which deals with the description of substances originated from microorganism metabolism that are “active” to human senses (2). Depicting the relevant volatile fraction in wines has been an ongoing task in recent decades to which several research groups have allocated important resources. The most common strategy has been the “target approach” in order to identify the “key odorants” for a given wine varietal.

During the tasting of a fine, old wine, the aromas generated in the glass are intertwined in an intimate, complex manner, expressing the fragrance of the aging bouquet. This aging bouquet, which develops during bottle storage through a complex transformation process, may result in a broad palette of nuances. Among these, undergrowth, truffle, toasted, spicy, licorice, fresh red- and black-berry fruit and mint descriptors were recently identified as features of its olfactory representation for red Bordeaux wines. Although a targeted chemical approach focusing on volatile sulfur compounds revealed the role played by dimethyl sulfide, 2-furanmethanethiol, and 3-sulfanylhexanol as molecular markers of the typicality of the wine aging bouquet of red Bordeaux wines, its chemical transcription has only partially been elucidated.

Phenolic compounds are very important in crop plants and have been the subject of a large number of studies. Three main reasons can be cited for optimizing the level of phenolic compounds in crop plants: their physiological role in plants, their technological significance for food processing, and their nutritional characteristics1 Indeed, an enormous diversity of phenolic antioxidants is found in fruits and vegetables, and their presence and roles can be affected or modified by several pre- and postharvest cultural practices and/or food processing technologies (Ruiz-García et al. 2012, Goldman et al. 1999, Tudela et al. 2002). In winegrapes, the technological importance of phenolic compounds, mainly flavonoids, is well-known.