Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Comparison of aroma-related compounds of carbonic maceration and traditional young red winemaking in case of Merlot by means of targeted metabolomic approach

Comparison of aroma-related compounds of carbonic maceration and traditional young red winemaking in case of Merlot by means of targeted metabolomic approach

Abstract

Winemaking decisions and techniques are known to affect the final aromatic composition of red wines. Winemakers put a constant effort into the improved controlling of vinification procedures to achieve better quality. Anyway an increased customer’s demand for uniqueness is often forcing them to adjust and offer new and new interesting products. To support the producers, an improved knowledge on aromatic potential as affected by classical and alternative strategies is needed. A classical method to produce regional Vipava valley young, fresh type of red wine was thus tested in comparison with carbonic maceration technique on the grapes from Merlot. This variety is of global, but also vast local importance as it is the most abundant red variety of the valley. The grapes first underwent separate processing and winemaking treatments, operating with 100 L volume in triplicates. After bottling, the experimental wines were subjected to semiquantitative metabolic profiling of volatile compounds (VOCs) by means of GC/MS. In addition, a sensorial evaluation of finished wines was performed to disclose the outcomes more from the consumer perspective. The results of free VOCs in wines produced by classical approach showed higher concentrations of 2 phenyl ethanol, n-hexanol, isobutanol and isoamyl alcohol, whereas the wines from grapes processed by carbonic maceration (CM) contained more aromatic acids (decanoic, octanoic, butyric), isopentylacetate and ethyl lactate. When observing bound VOCs, CM wines mainly indicated more alcohols (1-octanol, 1 nonanol, 1 hexanol, 1 pentanol, 1 butanol, 3-phenylpropan-1-ol and isoamyl alcohol), whereas classically produced wines contained more benzenoids (e.g. acetovanillone, vanillylacetone and some aldehydes, esters and alcohols (e.g. homovanillyl alcohol, benzyl alcohol). Sensory evaluation mainly supported the analytical results but also implied which compounds may deserve a special attention in further studies. In conclusion, a targeted metabolomics approach was shown to be a very useful tool in gaining a novel, more complex knowledge and understanding of aroma-related potential, manipulated by different winemaking processes. Key words: alternative vinification procedures, carbonic maceration, Merlot, free aroma compounds, bound aroma compounds, targeted metabolomics.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

Melita Sternad Lemut*, Cesare Lotti, Urska Vrhovsek

*University of Nova Gorica

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Directed Evolution of Oenococcus oeni: optimising yeast-bacteria interactions for improved malolactic fermentation

Malolactic fermentation (MLF) is a secondary step in the vinification process and it follows alcoholic fermentation (AF) which is predominantly carried out by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. These two processes result in the degradation of metabolites to produce secondary metabolites which also contribute to the final wine flavour and quality. AF results in the production of ethanol and carbon dioxide from sugars and MLF stems from the degradation of L-malic acid (a dicarboxylic acid) to L-lactic acid (a monocarboxylic acid). The latter process results in a smoother texture as the acidity of the wine is reduced by the process, it also adds to the flavour complexity of the wine.

Microbial stabilization of wines using innovative coiled UV-C reactor process: impact on chemical and organoleptic proprieties

For several years, numerous studies aimed at limiting the use of SO2 in wines (thermal treatments, pulsed electric fields, microwaves …). Processes must be able to preserve the organoleptic qualities of wines with low energy consumption. In this context, ultraviolet radiations (UV-C), at 254 nm, are well known for their germicidal proprieties. In order to inactivate microorganisms in grape juice and wine without affecting the quality of the product, efficiency of UV-C treatment process should be optimized.

Pesticide removal in wine with a physical treatment by molecular sieving

All along the winemaking process, conditioning and aging, wine is susceptible to be contaminated by different molecules. Contaminations can have various origins, related to wine microorganisms or as a result of an exogenous contamination. The aforementioned contamination of the wine can be caused by the migration of molecules from the materials in contact with the wine or by a contamination from exogenous molecules present in the air. Regardless of the source of the contamination, mainly two types of consequences can be observed.

Full automation of oenological fermentations and its application to the processing of must containing high sugar or acetic acid concentrations

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.

Removal of Fumonisin B1 and B2 from red wine using polymeric substances

The Ability of PVPP (Polyvinylpolypyrrolidone), PVP-DEGMA-TAIC (copolimerization of N-vinyl-2-pyrrolidinone with ethylene glycol dimethacrylate and triallyl isocyanurate) and PAEGDMA
(poly(acrylamide-co-ethylene glycol dimethacrylate)) polymers was tested as removal agents for Fumonisin B1 (FB1) and Fumonisin B2 (FB2) from model solutions and red wine. The polymers removal capacity was checked at three different resident times (2, 8 and 24 hours of contact time between the polymer and the sample), showing no differences in the percentage of FB1 and FB2 removal. Then, different polymer concentrations (1, 5 and 10 mg mL-1) were tested in model solution with and without phenolics (i.e. gallic acid and 4-methylcatechol).