Effect of nanofiltration on the chemical composition and wine quality

Sessile oak and pedunculate oak have shown several differences of interest for enological purposes. Tannic and aromatic composition among sessile oak or pedonculate oak has been well studied. Sessile oak is generally more aromatic than pedunculated, while the later is more tannic. This scientific point of view is rarely applied to classify oak in cooperages. Most coopers use the type of grain to distinguish wide and thin grain.

Saccharomyces cerevisiae (SC) is the main driver of alcoholic fermentation however, in wine, non-Saccharomyces species can have a powerful effect on aroma and flavor formation. This study aimed to compare untargeted volatile compound profiles from SPME-GC×GC-TOF-MS of Sauvignon blanc and Shiraz wine inoculated with six different non-Saccharomyces yeasts followed by SC. Torulaspora delbrueckii (TD), Lachancea thermotolerans (LT), Pichia kluyveri (PK) and Metschnikowia pulcherrima (MP) were commercial starter strains, while Candida zemplinina (CZ) and Kazachstania aerobia (KA), were isolated from wine grape environments. Each fermentation produced a distinct chemical profile that was unique for both grape musts. The SC-monoculture and CZ-SC sequential fermentations were the most distinctly different in the Sauvignon blanc while the LT-SC sequential fermentations were the most different from the control in the Shiraz fermentations.

Yeast cells possess a cell wall comprising primarily glycoproteins, mannans, and glucan polymers. Several yeast phenotypes relevant for fermentation, wine processing, and wine quality are correlated with cell wall properties. To investigate the effect of wine fermentation on cell wall composition, a study was performed using mid-infrared (MIR) spectroscopy coupled with multivariate methods (i.e., PCA and OPLS-DA). A total of 40 yeast strains were evaluated, including Saccharomyces strains (laboratory and industrial) and non-Saccharomyces species. Cells were fermented in both synthetic MS300 and Chardonnay grape must to stationery phase, processed, and scanned in the MIR spectrum.

Introduction: Malolactic fermentation (MLF) is a common process in winemaking to reduce wine acidity, maintain microbial stability and modify wine aroma. However, successful MLF is often hampered by their sluggish or stuck activity of malolactic bacteria (MLB) which may be caused by nutrient deficiency, especially when MLB are inoculated after alcoholic fermentation (Alexandre et al., 2004; Lerm et al., 2010). Identification and characterization of essential nutrients and growth factors for MLB allows for production of highly efficient nutrient supplements for MLF.

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].