Sensory analysis in oenology: the role of methodological differences in expert panel evaluations

Abstract

Sensory analysis is an essential component of oenology, offering valuable insights into wine quality that influence decision-making in viticulture and winemaking. Its ability to detect and assess organoleptic characteristics is directly linked to the expertise of the professionals performing the analysis. However, the lack of a universally accepted standard for descriptors, scales, and thresholds presents a challenge for the comparison and interpretation of sensory data across different contexts [1].

A comprehensive understanding of the methodological variations in sensory analysis is crucial for moving toward a more unified system of evaluation. By coordinating sensory tests across different expert panels, it is possible to evaluate their performance, refine techniques, and ultimately increase the reliability and consistency of sensory data [2]. Such an approach not only improves the accuracy of wine evaluations but also enhances quality control. and consequently, the validity of results and issued reports.

To explore these differences, a network of thirteen expert panels in Spain, each comprising between 6 and 15 tasters, participated in sensory evaluations of wine samples using three distinct but commonly applied methods [3] [4]. These methods, grounded in established interlaboratory sensory exercises, were tested over three separate sessions throughout 2024. The objective was to investigate the impact of methodological differences on the results and assess how these variations might influence the consistency of wine evaluation across panels.

The results revealed notable discrepancies in the application of intensity scales and defect identification. While panels generally agreed on the detection of common wine faults, the concentration levels at which these defects were identified varied significantly. Additionally, while there was some consistency in recognizing specific aromatic families, the identification of individual aromas was much more variable across panels. These findings highlight the inherent challenges in sensory analysis and the importance of standardizing evaluation criteria to ensure comparability and enhance the reliability of wine assessments.

The study underscores the need for a more cohesive approach in sensory oenology. Standardized descriptors, scales, and thresholds would not only improve the consistency of sensory data but also support quality assurance measures and foster greater confidence among consumers and industry stakeholders alike.

References

[1] I. E. Alonso, Vitoria-Gazteiz: Universidad del País Vasco, 2009.

[2] M. M. Pinto, Ciência e técnica vitivinícola, vol. 36, nº 1, pp. 22-31, 2021.

[3] OIV, 2016.

[4] M. Pinto, P. Barros, A. Vilela y E. Correia, Ciência e técnica vitivinícola, vol. 39, nº 1, pp. 30-50, 2024.