Evaluation of aroma characteristics in Vitis amurensis grapes across different regions by using HS-SPME-GC/MS

According to the algorithm “A step back towards the future 4.1C”, (Cargnello,1986a, 1987d, 1988a.b, 1991, 1993, 1994b, 1995, 1999a.e, 2000b, 2007c, 2008a, 2009d, 2013; and according to the principles of “Charter of Sustainable Viticulture BIO‐MetaEthics 4.1CC” of GiESCO (Carbonneau and Cargnello, 2003 2015, 2017), the historical, applied philosophy and productive analysis connected to the innovations and to the “Certification of the Universal Holistic MetaEthical Sustainability 4.1C” “indexed new global production model 4.1C” has always been fundamental, especially for the “Prosecco Territory” and for the “Prosecco Wine” to design and implement their synergistic future “Sustainable and Certificable 4.1CC” according to the principles of the “Charter of Sustainable Viticulture BIO‐MetaEthics 4.1CC” by the GiESCO (Carbonneau and Cargnello, lc, Cargnello et Carbonneau, 2007, 2018), and of the Conegliano Campus 5.1C. (Cargnello, lc). Nowadays, people think that Prosecco is a wine from the Veneto Region (from Conegliano and Valdobbiadene in particular), while it comes from Friuli‐Venezia Giulia Region (in North Eastern Italy, such as Veneto) more precisely from “Prosecco” in the Municipality of Trieste (TS‐Italy), as documented in 1382 and in 1548, when Pier Andrea Mattioli, described “that ancient wine, which is born in Prosecco”, as a wine with the following characteristics “thin, clear, shiny, golden, odorous and pleasant to taste». In 1888 at the “Wine Fair” of Trieste there were the “Sparkling wine Prosecco” by Giovanni Balanc, by Giuseppe Klampferer and that one by Marino Luxa. In the 19th century, many expressed their appreciation for the “Prosecco” of Trieste. In order to implement intra and extra territorial and cross‐border relations, as well as, the “Certification of: Products, Companies, Territory, Bio‐MétaÉthique District 4.1C” of Prosecco, a series of activities and researches were conducted in 8 companies: 5 in the “Territory of Prosecco” (TS) in which the principles of “Charter of Sustainable Viticulture BIO‐MetaEthics 4.1CC” of GiESCO (Carbonneau and Cargnello, lc) have been successfully applied. In particolar: 1‐ new and original “Sustainable 4.1C global production model” developed also to prevent the problems caused by wild boar, roe deer, and birds while safeguarding their “psychophysical wellness”, as well as the “psychophysical wellness 4.1C” of the macro and micro flora and fauna, of the biodiversity, of the landscape, etc. (Cargnello, lc), 1.2‐ chemical weed control and “Non MetaEthics 4.1C” processing with the total grass growing of the ground without or with mowing, better if it is manual to protect grass, air and soil, 2‐ recovery of “Historic”: land, vineyards, vines, biodiversity, landscapes, productions, products, … , 3‐ production of the famous “Prosekar, also rosé, of Prosecco” and “Prosecco di Prosecco”, according to “A step back towards the future 4.1C” 4‐ to offer a deserved psychophysical well‐being to the “Prosecco Territory” and entrepreneurs. 

The presentation will approach the understanding of wine consumers´ perception based on the experiential model suggested by Warell (2008). In this framework, wine consumption gives rise to a
variety of experiences related to the perception, understanding, and judgment of the product. These
multidimensional facets of the drinking experience can be explored by measuring affective, cognitive,
and sensory responses of consumers, which are shown to be stable regardless of the social context.

Landscapes such as its representation express values, beliefs and intentions of the individuals and the communities that produce them.

The increasing vulnerability of food systems is a pressing challenge amplified by global interconnectedness.

[English version below]

L’objectif de l’étude est de mettre en évidence les différences rencontrées entre les vins Barbera d’Asti, qui sont produits en AOC. Celles-ci sont imputées aux terroirs caractérisés selon les facteurs pédologiques, climatiques, et qui conduisent à des différents potentiels viticoles et œnologiques. Il est proposé une individualisation des sous-zones.