On the losses of dissolved CO2 during champagne aging

Nitrogen is an important nutrient of yeast and its low content in grape must is a major cause for sluggish fermentations. To prevent problems during fermentation, a supplementation of the must with ammonium salts or more complex nitrogen mixtures is practiced in the cellar. However this correction seems to improve only partially the quality of wine [1]. In fact, yeast is using nitrogen in many of its metabolic pathways and depending of the sort of the nitrogen source (ammonium or amino acids) it produces different flavor active compounds. A limitation in amino acids can lead to a change in the metabolic pathways of yeast and consequently alter 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.

Around the world, the alcohol content of wine has been steadily increasing; partly as a consequence of climate change, but also due to improvements in viticultural management practices and winemaking techniques [1,2]. Concurrently, market demand for wines with lower alcohol levels has increased as consumers seek to reduce alcohol intake for social and/or health reasons [3]. As such, there is increasing demand for both innovative methods that allow winemakers to produce ‘reduced alcohol wines’ (RAW) and a better understanding of the impact of such methods on the composition of RAW. This study therefore aimed to investigate compositional changes in two red wines resulting from partial alcohol removal following treatment by one such method, involving a combination of reverse osmosis and evaporative perstraction (RO-EP).

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].

Céline Sparrow a, Christophe Morge a, a SOFRALAB SAS, 79, av. A.A. Thévenet – CS 11031 – 51530 Magenta, France Consumers’ health and security force authorities to limit, in wine as in others food industry products, the concentration in « dangerous » molecules. Therefore the legal limit in heavy metals keeps on decreasing. As per proof EU regulation just decrease the stain concentration in wine from 0,2 to 0,15 mg/l. Certain changes , such as sodium arsenite treatment in vines, disappearance of brass in wineries to the benefit of stainless steel, limit even more the concentration of heavy metals in wines. But the use of copper derivates in vines treatments is difficult to replace. In the case of wine and its elaboration, the problem is even more complex. Indeed, regulation forces the wine producers to control the concentration of certain heavy metals in final wines.