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

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 color of a red wine is one of the most important parameters of its quality, giving much information on its status, such as the grape variety used or the winemaking style. As the result of a complex equilibrium between different forms of anthocyanins and polymerization reactions which occur over the course of time, color can also serve as an indication of a wines’ age. For this purpose the “chemical age” i and ii indexes have been introduced by Somers in 1977. The chemical age index i measures the color absorbance after the addition of acetaldehyde while chemical index ii provides an indication of how much of the total red pigments are resistant to SO2 bleaching.

Beihong and Beimei were bred as winemaking cultivars released by Institute of Botany, the Chinese Academy of Sciences in 2008. The cultivars are selected from the population of ‘Muscat Hamburg’ (Vitis vinifera) ×V. amurensis. They are extended to most provinces in North of China because they have strong resistance to cold and disease and need not be buried in soil in winter. To better understand the effect of cropload on volatile compounds during wine-making, we surveyed volatiles composition and content of different cropload level in 3-years-old ‘Beihong’ and ‘Beimei’ vines which planted in east foot of Helan mountain of Ningxia (EHN).

Leaf removal in the bunch zone is a common viticultural practice with several objectives, yet it has been difficult to conclusively link the physiological mechanism(s) and metabolic berry impact to this widely practiced treatment. We used a field-omics approach1 in a Sauvignon blanc high altitude model vineyard, showing that the early leaf removal in the bunch zone caused quantifiable and stable responses (over years) in the microclimate where the main perturbation was increased exposure. We provide an explanation for how leaf removal leads to the shifts in grape metabolites typically linked to this treatment and confirm anecdotal evidence and previous reports that leaf removal treatment at an early stage of berry development affects “quality-associated” metabolites (monoterpenes and norisoprenoids).

In the winemaking process, several compounds that remain in the grape skins and seeds after the fermentation stage are bioactive-compounds (substances with potential beneficial effects on health) that can be extracted in order to recovery valuable substances with a high commercial value for the cosmetic, food (nutraceuticals) and pharmaceutical industries. The skins contain significant amounts of bioactive substances such as tannins (16-27%) and other polyphenolic compounds (2-6.5%) in particular, catechins, anthocyanins, proanthocyanins, quercetin , ellagic acid and resveratrol.