Quantification of the production of hydrogen peroxide H2O2 during wine oxidation

INTRODUCTION: Foam stability of sparkling wines is significantly favored by the presence of surface active agents such as proteins and polysaccharides [1]. For that reason, the renowned sparkling wines are aged after the second fermentation in contact with the lees for several months (even years). Thereby wines are enriched in these macromolecules due to yeast autolysis. Since this practice is slow and costly, winemakers are seeking for alternative procedures to increase their concentration in base wines. In that sense, the supplementation with inactive yeast during alcoholic fermentation has been proposed [2]. The aim of this study was to determine whether this new strategy is really useful for enriching base wines in macromolecules and for improving foam properties of the base wines.

Originally, the role of the malolactic fermentation (MLF) was simply to improve the microbial stability of wine via biological deacidification. However, there is an accumulation of evidence to support the fact that lactic acid bacteria (LAB) also contribute positively to the taste and aroma of wine. Many different LAB enter into grape juice and wine from the surface of grape berries, cluster stems, vine leaves, soil and winery equipment. Due to the highly selective environment of juices and wine, only a few types of LAB are able to grow.

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].

Polyphenols are present in a wide variety of plants and foods such as tea, cacao and grape1. An important sub-class of these compounds is the flavanols present in grapes and wines as monomers (e.g (+)-catechin or (-)-epicatechin), or polymers also called condensed tannins or proanthocyanidins. They have important antioxidant properties2 but their biosynthesis remains partly unknown. Some recent studies have focused on the role of glycosylated intermediates that are involved in the transport of the monomers and may serve as precursors in the polymerization mechanism3, 4. The global objective of this work is to identify flavanol glycosides in grapes or wines, describe their structure and determine their abundance during grape development and in wine.

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.