Enoforum 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Enoforum Web 9 Enoforum Web Conference 2021 9 Cellar session 9 Adaptation of Lactobacilli towards low ph and SO2 to develop MLF in base musts for sparkling wines

Adaptation of Lactobacilli towards low ph and SO2 to develop MLF in base musts for sparkling wines

Abstract

In some white wines, malolactic fermentation (MLF) is very interesting, and for low pH wines this process is particularly difficult. Although MLF is generally not recommended for sparkling white wine, some winemakers prefer to promote MLF to contribute to organoleptic complexity. Oenococcus oeni is generally the bacterium of choice for MLF. However, people’s interest in other species (such as Lactobacillus) is increasing. However, one disadvantage of lactobacilli is that they are more sensitive to low pH and SO2, and some producers of starters inoculate high doses of non-growing bacteria in grape musts. This work aims to grow some selected strains of Lactobacillus in grape juice and perform early MLF. With this strategy, beyond performing the MLF homolactic bacteria can contribute clearly to maintain or even decrease the final pH in wines by producing lactic acid from sugars; they also produce more complex wines, and prevent the spoilage of an undesired late MLF in bottles. 

To perform this selection, twelve Lactobacillus strains were successively inoculated after adapting to the lowering of pH and the increasing concentration of SO2. The cell concentration of the inoculum was in the order of x 106 CFU/mL to allow growth and synthesis of lactic acid. All Lactobacillus strains gradually adapted to low pH and SO2 and could grow at pH 3.2 and the highest SO2 concentration, thereby maintaining or even increasing their final biomass. After 7 days, all strains always underwent MLF. Malic acid consumption rate and lactic acid production depend on the strain. The final pH of wines was maintained or even decreased, even when complete MLF was achieved. This strategy helps in biological acidification of wines against the loss of acidity derived from climate change.

DOI:

Publication date: April 23, 2021

Issue: Enoforum 2021

Type: Article

Authors

FERRER Sergi, POLO Lucía, ANDRÉS Lorena, PARDO Isabel

Institut de Biotecnologia i Biomedicina (BioTecMed), Universitat de València, Spain

Contact the author

Tags

Enoforum 2021 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Genomic perspective of Lachancea thermotolerans in wine bioacidification

We have sequenced two commercial strains of Lachancea thermotolerans (Lt) from the company Lallemand: Laktia™ y Blizz™.

Consistency of the hydraulic traits and stomatal responses in grapevines with contrasting hydraulic vulnerability

Different from wild species in arid and semiarid conditions, cultivated species are very sensitive to drought and, beyond some stress thresholds, food production is not possible

Composition and molar mass distribution of different must and wine colloids

A major problem for winemakers is the formation of proteinaceous haze after bottling. Although the exact mechanisms remain unclear, this haze is formed by unfolding and agglomeration of grape proteins, being additionally influenced by numerous further factors.

Ecophysiological performance of Vitis rootstocks under water stress

The use of rootstocks tolerant to soil water deficit is an interesting strategy to cope with limited water availability. Currently, several nurseries are breeding new genotypes, but the physiological basis of its responses under water stress are largely unknown. To this end, an ecophysiological assessment of the conventional 110-Richter (110R) and SO4, and the new M1 and M4 rootstocks was carried out in potted ungrafted plants. During one season, these Vitis genotypes were grown under greenhouse conditions and subjected to two water regimes, well-watered and water deficit. Water potentials of plants under water deficit down to < -1.4 MPa, and net photosynthesis (AN) <5 μmol m-2 s-1 did not cause leaf oxidative stress damage compared to well-watered conditions in any of the genotypes. The antioxidant capacity was sufficient to neutralize the mild oxidative stress suffered. Under both treatments, gravimetric differences in daily water use were observed among genotypes, leading to differences in the biomass of root, shoot and leaf. Under well-watered conditions, SO4 and 110R were the most vigorous and M1 and M4 the least. However, under water stress, SO4 exhibited the greatest reduction in biomass while M4 showed the lowest. Remarkably, under these conditions, SO4 reached the least negative stem water potential (Ψstem), while M1 reduced stomatal conductance (gs) and AN the most. In addition, SO4 and M1 genotypes also showed the highest and lowest hydraulic conductance values, respectively. Our results suggest that there are differences in water use regulation among genotypes, not only attributed to differences in stomatal regulation or intrinsic water use efficiency at the leaf level. Therefore, because no differences in canopy-to-root ratio were achieved, it is hypothesized that xylem vessel anatomical differences may be driving the reported differences among rootstocks performance. Results demonstrate that each Vitis rootstock differs in its ecophysiological responses under water stress.

A first look at the aromatic profile of “Monferace” wines

Grignolino, is a native Piedmont grape variety which well represents the historical and
enological identity of Monferrato, a territory between Asti and Casale Monferrato, included in the World Heritage List designated by UNESCO (1).