Effect of nanofiltration on the chemical composition and wine quality

Those previous years, pesticides are often brought to the forefront by media. Questions arose about their toxicity for growers and consumers. Even if a downward trend is underway, the use of pesticides is required to ensure steady quality and quantity of harvests. A large number of active ingredients are authorized but regarding viticulture, mainly insecticides and fungicides are applied, to control pests and diseases and to increase crop yield. Some phytosanitary products, principally fungicides, applied close to the harvest date may frequently be detected in wines.

Climate change and harvest date decisions have led to the evolution of must quality over the last decades. Increases in must sugar concentrations are among the most obvious consequences, quantitatively. Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a robust and acid tolerant organism. These properties, its sugar to ethanol conversion rate and ethanol tolerance make it the ideal production organism for wine fermentations. Unfortunately, high sugar concentrations may affect S. cerevisiae and lead to growth inhibition or yeast lysis, and cause sluggish or stuck fermentations. Even sublethal conditions cause a hyperosmotic stress response in S. cerevisiae which leads to increased formation of fermentation by-products, including acetic acid, which may exceed legal limits in some wines.

Limited information is available on grape wall-derived polymeric structure/composition and how this changes during fermentation. Commercial winemaking operations use enzymes that target the polysaccharide-rich polymers of the cell walls of grape tissues to clarify musts and extract pigments during the fermentations. In this study we have assessed changes in polysaccharide composition/ turnover throughout the winemaking process by applying recently developed cell wall profiling approaches to both wine and pomace polysaccharides. The methods included gas chromatography for monosaccharide composition (GC-MS), infra-red (IR) spectroscopy and comprehensive microarray polymer profiling
(CoMPP) using cell wall probes.

In red wines the post-MLF SO2 addition is an essential event. It is also the case for the “mutage” during the elaboration of the “liquoreux”. At these moments SO2 plays an antimicrobial action and an antioxidant effect. But at current pH of wines, ensuring a powerful molecular SO2 has become very difficult. Recent work on Brettanomyces strains have also shown that some strains are resistant up to 1.2 mg / L of molecular SO2. It’s also the case of the some Saccharomuces or Zygosaccharomyces strains suitable to re-ferment “liquoreux” wines after the “mutage”.

Champagne or sparkling wines elaborated through the same traditional method, which consists in two major yeast-fermented steps, typically hold about 10 to 12 g/L of dissolved CO2 after the second fermentation in a closed bottle. Hundreds of molecules and macromolecules originating from grape and yeast cohabit with dissolved CO2; they are essential compounds contributing to many organoleptic characteristics (effervescence, foam, aroma, taste, colour…). Indeed, the second alcoholic fermentation and the maturation on lees (which may last from 12 months up to several years) both induce various quantitative and qualitative changes in the wine through the action of yeast, as listed hereafter: development of aromas during aging on lees, release of nitrogen compounds during autolysis and release of macromolecules (polysaccharides, lipids, nucleic acids) in wine.