Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 On the losses of dissolved CO2 during champagne aging

On the losses of dissolved CO2 during champagne aging

Abstract

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). Moreover, because gaseous and dissolved CO2 experience thermodynamic equilibrium in the closed bottle (through the so-called Henry’s law), the level of dissolved CO2 also inevitably decreases as time proceeds during aging on lees. Actually, in champagne tasting, the level of dissolved CO2 is indeed a parameter of paramount importance since it is responsible for the bubbling process (the so-called effervescence). Keeping the dissolved CO2 as long as possible inside the bottle during aging is therefore a challenge of importance for Champagne wine elaborators, especially for old vintages collections likely to age on lees for long periods of time. Here, measurements of dissolved CO2 concentrations were done in a collection of various vintages (from a prestige cuvee provided by our partner), initially holding the same level of CO2 after the “prise de mousse” (classically close to 11.5 g/L), but having experienced different periods of aging on lees (ranging from several months up to 35 years). Progressive losses of dissolved CO2 concentrations were evidenced, depending on the period of time spent in contact with lees. Our results were compared with a previous set of experimental data, and with a multi-parameter model recently developed which provides the level of dissolved CO2 in wine as a function of time. It is worth noting that both the diameter of the bottleneck, and the bottle volume, were found to be key parameters as concerns the losses of dissolved CO2 during champagne aging. Equipe Effervescence (GSMA), Université de Reims, France Laboratoire de Recherches, Champagne Moët & Chandon, Epernay, France

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

Gérard Liger-Belair*

*Equipe Effervescence (GSMA)

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

WineMetrics: A new approach to unveil the “wine-like aroma” chemical feature

“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.

Comprehensive exploration of wine aroma-related compounds as promoted by alternative vinification procedures in case of Zelen (Vitis vinifera L.) grapes processing

Not only vintner’s decisions in the vineyard, but also winemaker’s choices of technology approaches in the cellar play a significant role in the final wine style and quality. Whereas traditional technologies within chosen terroir are quite well explored and thus somehow predictable, there is no proper knowledge available on possible outcomes in case of implementing novel, alternative winemaking strategies. To reveal their effects on wine aroma compounds and sensory characteristics, two alternative strategies
(cryoextraction or addition of whole grape berries during last stages of fermentation) were compared to classical Vipava valley winemaking approach as normally used for an autochthonous variety Zelen. After separate vinification and bottling, all the experimental wines were subjected to semiquantitative metabolic profiling of volatile compounds (VOCs) by means of GC/MS and were then also sensorialy evaluated by pre-trained panel.

Microbial life in the grapevine: what can we expect from the leaf microbiome?

The above-ground parts of plants, which constitute the phyllosphere, have long been considered devoid of bacteria and fungi, at least in their internal tissues and microbial presence there was long considered a sign of disease. However, recent studies have shown that plants harbour complex bacterial communities, the so-called “microbiome”[1]. We are only beginning to unravel the origin of these bacterial plant inhabitants, their community structure and their roles, which in analogy to the gut microbiome, are likely to be of essential nature. Among their multifaceted metabolic possibilities, bacteria have been recently demonstrated to emit a wide range of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which can greatly impact the growth and development of both the plant and its disease-causing agents.

Modulating role of SO2 in white wine protein haze formation

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].

Molecular cloning and characterization of UDP-glucose: furaneol glucosyltransferase gene from Japanese

2,5-Dimethyl-4-hydroxy-3(2H)-furanone (furaneol) is an important aroma compound in fruits, such as pineapple and strawberry, and is reported to contribute to the strawberry-like note in some wines. Several grapevine species are used in winemaking, and furaneol is one of the characteristic aroma compounds in wines made from American grape (Vitis labrusca) and its hybrid grape, similar to methyl anthranilate. Muscat Bailey A is a hybrid grape variety [V. labrusca (Bailey) x V. vinifera (Muscat Hamburg)], and its wine is one of the most popular in Japan. The inclusion of Muscat Bailey A in the ‘International List of Vine and Varieties and their Synonyms’ managed by the ‘International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV)’ in 2013 has further fueled its popularity among winemakers and researchers worldwide.