Xylem vessel blockages in grape pedicel growing in tropical climate observed by microtomography

Winemakers are increasingly experimenting with new techniques, such as spontaneous fermentation, prolonged yeast contact, higher pH, minimal sulphur dioxid, filtration and clarification or oxidative ageing. Along with this, the risk of microbial spoilage increases, and so the off-flavour mousiness, long time underestimated, is becoming more frequent. Characteristic of the mousy off-flavour is the delayed perception after swallowing the wine. After a few seconds the flavour appears, reminiscent of a dirty mouse cage. There are three known compounds that cause mousy off-flavor: 2-ethyltetrahydropyridine, 2-acetyltetrahydopyridine, and 2-acetylpyrroline. Yeasts such as Dekkera/Brettanomyces and heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria like Lactobacillus hilgardii can release these compounds.

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.19.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

Brettanomyces bruxellensis, commonly referred to as “Brett,” is one of the most notorious microorganisms implicated in wine spoilage. This yeast species has developed a noteworthy resistance to sulfur dioxide, a widely used preservative in winemaking, prompting the wine industry to seek new antimicrobial agents.

Adapting viticulture to climate change is crucial, as it presents significant challenges for future grape production.

The main objective of this study was to establish if beet sugar produces a different concentration of “fruity” volatile aroma compounds (VOCs), compared to cane sugar when used for second alcoholic fermentation of Auxerrois sparkling wines. Auxerrois base wine from the 2020 vintage was separated into two lots; half was fermented with cane sugar and half with beet sugar (both sucrose products and tested for sugar purity). These sugars were used in yeast acclimation (IOC 2007), and base wines for the second fermentation (12 bottles each). Base wines were manually bottled at the Cool Climate Oenology and Viticulture Institute (CCOVI) research winery. The standard chemical analysis took place at intervals of 0, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks post-bottling. Acidity and pH measurements were carried out by an auto-titrator. Residual Sugar (g/L) (glucose (g/L), fructose (g/L)), YAN (mg N/L), malic acid, and acetic acid (g/L) were analyzed by Megazyme assay kits. parameters were analyzed by Megazyme assay kits. Alcohol (% v/v) was assessed by GC-FID. VOC analysis of base wines, finished sparkling wines, as well as the two sugars in model sparkling wine solutions, was carried out by GC-MS. VOCs included ethyl octanoate, ethyl hexanoate, ethyl butanoate, ethyl decanoate, ethyl-2-methylbutyrate, ethyl-3-methylbutyrate, ethyl 2-methyl propanoate, ethyl 2- hydroxy propanoate, 1-hexanol, 2-phenylethan-1-ol, ethyl acetate, hexyl acetate, isoamyl acetate and 2-phenylethyl acetate.