Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 The effect of organic, biodynamic and conventional production processes on the intrinsic and perceived quality of a typical wine

The effect of organic, biodynamic and conventional production processes on the intrinsic and perceived quality of a typical wine

Abstract

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the organic, biodynamic and conventional production processes on the typicality of the Chianti DOCG wine and the relation with the environmental impact in terms of CO2 production. Typicality can be defined as a set of properties, described by an intrinsic and perceived quality. Intrinsic quality is the resultant of an eligibility profile, whose parameters are common to all wines (e.g., the sensory attributes and chemical compounds related to acidity, astringency, persistence, alcohol, viscosity, etc.); an identity profile, whose parameters are related to the grape variety and the terroir (aroma and volatile profiles); a style profile related to the brand, expression of the winemaking related choices.

METHODS: Fourteen commercial Chianti DOCG wines from 2016 harvest were selected based on their production management including organic, biodynamic and conventional. A survey was set up in order to get vineyard and winemaking information from the different estates producing the wines object of the present study. This information was converted in terms of estimated carbon dioxide production, on the basis of existing literature data about Life Cycle Analysis (LCA). Phenolic and volatile compositions, color indices and standard chemical parameters were determined on wines.Quantitative Descriptive Analysis was applied to define the eligibility, identity, and style properties (the intrinsic quality), while a group of 45 experts evaluated the differences between wines by Napping test and rated their typicality (perceived quality). For the evaluation of the chemical and sensory differences between wines, three global different models were created (conventional, organic and biodynamic) using a Soft Modelling of Class Analogy (SIMCA).

RESULTS: As regard the results of the survey, the organic and biodynamic managements showed the lower level of estimated values of carbon dioxide production. The statistical elaboration of the chemical and sensory data underlined that the different wine estate managements did not yield any systematic differences on the intrinsic and perceived quality, despite there were detected significant differences between wines. Moreover different levels of quality were evidenced inside every kind of management. In particular, the SIMCA model built on the chemical and sensory profiles highlighted that the conventional wine models presented the less variability, as opposed to the biodynamic model that resulted the more variable in terms of intrinsic and perceived quality.

CONCLUSIONS

The environmentally friendly production processes, such as organic and biodynamic production, with a low environmental impact, may not have necessarily an effect on the identity and thus on the typicality of wine. The process control represents the critical point for all the three kind of

DOI:

Publication date: September 7, 2021

Issue: Macrowine 2021

Type: Article

Authors

Monica Picchi

Department of Agricultural, Food, Environmental, and Forestry Sciences and Technologies – University of Florence, via Donizetti, 6 – 50144 Firenze (Italy),Francesco MAIOLI, Department of Agricultural, Food, Environmental, and Forestry Sciences and Technologies – University of Florence, via Donizetti, 6 – 50144 Firenze (Italy)  Valentina CANUTI, Department of Agricultural, Food, Environmental, and Forestry Sciences and Technologies – University of Florence, via Donizetti, 6 – 50144 Firenze (Italy)  Valentina MILLARINI, Department of Agricultural, Food, Environmental, and Forestry Sciences and Technologies – University of Florence, via Donizetti, 6 – 50144 Firenze (Italy)  Paola DOMIZIO, Department of Agricultural, Food, Environmental, and Forestry Sciences and Technologies – University of Florence, via Donizetti, 6 – 50144 Firenze (Italy)  Bruno ZANONI, Department of Agricultural, Food, Environmental, and Forestry Sciences and Technologies – University of Florence, via Donizetti, 6 – 50144 Firenze (Italy)

Contact the author

Keywords

sangiovese; biodynamic wine; organic wine; quality; typicality; carbon footprint

Citation

Related articles…

δ13C : A still underused indicator in precision viticulture  

The first demonstration of the interest of carbon isotope composition of sugars in grapevine, as an integrated indicator of vineyard water status, dates back to 2000 (Gaudillère et al., 1999; Van Leeuwen et al., 2001). Thanks to the isotopic discrimination of Carbon that takes place during plant photosynthesis, under hydric stress conditions, it is possible to accurately estimate the photosynthetic activity. Ever since, δ13C has been widely applied with success to zonation, terroir studies and vine physiology research, but is still not widely used by viticulturists. This is quite astonishing by considering the impact of global warming on viticulture and the need to improve water management, that would justify a widespread use of δ13C.
The lack of private laboratories proposing the analysis, the cost of the technology, as well as the long analytical delays, have been detrimental to its development. Some laboratories tried to overcome the analytical difficulties of isotopic analysis by using fourier transformed infrared spectroscopy, as a fast and cheap alternative to the official OIV method (IRMS). These claimed FTIR models have never been published or peer reviewed and cannot be considered robust. In this work, thanks to the recent acquisition of IRMS technology, new modern and robust applications of δ13C for viticulture are proposed. This includes the use of the analysis to make parcel separations at harvesting, the possibility to increase the precision of hydric stress cartography and the potential cost reduction when compared with Scholander pressure bomb analysis.

Underpinning terroir with data: rethinking the zoning paradigm

Agriculture, natural resource management and the production and sale of products such as wine are increasingly data-driven activities. Thus, the use of remote and proximal crop and soil sensors to aid management decisions is becoming commonplace and ‘Agtech’ is proliferating commercially; mapping, underpinned by geographical information systems and complex methods of spatial analysis, is widely used. Likewise, the chemical and sensory analysis of wines draws on multivariate statistics; the efficient winery intake of grapes, subsequent production of wines and their delivery to markets relies on logistics; whilst the sales and marketing of wines is increasingly driven by artificial intelligence linked to the recorded purchasing behaviour of consumers. In brief, there is data everywhere!

Opinions will vary on whether these developments are a good thing. Those concerned with the ‘mystique’ of wine, or the historical aspects of terroir and its preservation, may find them confronting. In contrast, they offer an opportunity to those interested in the biophysical elements of terroir, and efforts aimed at better understanding how these impact on vineyard performance and the sensory attributes of resultant wines. At the previous Terroir Congress, we demonstrated the potential of analytical methods used at the within-vineyard scale in the development of Precision Viticulture, in contributing to a quantitative understanding of regional terroir. For this conference, we take this approach forward with examples from contrasting locations in both the northern and southern hemispheres. We show how, by focussing on the vineyards within winegrowing regions, as opposed to all of the land within those regions, we might move towards a more robust terroir zoning than one derived from a mixture of history, thematic mapping, heuristics and the whims of marketers. Aside from providing improved understanding by underpinning terroir with data, such methods should also promote improved management of the entire wine value chain.

Terroir traceability in grapes, musts and wine: results of research on Gewürztraminer and Sauvignon Blanc grape varieties in northern Italy

In the study of terroir, a separate analysis of its many component factors can be of great help in accurately identifying a vineyard’s natural elements that impact wine quality and typicity. This research used a dedicated pluri-disciplinary approach to investigate the ecological characteristics, including geology and geographical features, of 14 vineyards that produce Gewürztraminer and Sauvignon Blanc cultivars in the alpine Alto Adige DOC wine region. Both the geopedological method using Vineyards Geological Identity (VGI) and the new Solar Radiaton Identity (SRI) topoclimatic classification method were used to provide analytical measurements and qualitative/quantitative characterisations. In addition, wide-ranging targeted and untargeted oenological and chemical analyses were carried out on grapes, musts and wines to correlate the soils’ geomineral and physical conditions with the biochemical properties of their fruits and wines. The research identified strong correlations between vineyard geo-identity and wine biofingerprint, confirming a mineral traceability of strontium rubidium ratio and some minerals distinctive to the local geology, such as K, Ca, Ag, Ba and Mn.  The study also discovered that particular geomineral and physical soil conditions of the studied vineyards are related to the different amount of amino acids, primary varietal aromas and polyphenols found in grapes, musts and wines. The research confirmed that winemaking technologies support oenological quality, although in some cases, human practices can overpower certain characteristic elements in wine, erasing the typical imprint left by the vineyards’ natural terroir, which becomes less traceable. Terroir abiotic ecological factors and vineyard identity can be classified in detail using the new VGI and SRI analysis methods to discover interrelationships between geo-pedological and topoclimatic conditions that impact wine quality. These methods are also helpful in identifying which ecological elements are exclusive to a particular vineyard or wine sub-region.

Grapevine yield estimation in a context of climate change: the GraY model

Grapevine yield is a key indicator to assess the impacts of climate change and the relevance of adaptation strategies in a vineyard landscape. At this scale, a yield model should use a number of parameters and input data in relation to the information available and be able to reproduce vineyard management decisions (e.g. soil and canopy management, irrigation). In this study, we used data from six experimental sites in Southern France (cv. Syrah) to calibrate a model of grapevine yield limited by water constraint (GraY). Each yield component (bud fertility, number of berries per bunch, berry weight) was calculated as a function of the soil water availability simulated by the WaLIS water balance model at critical phenological phases. The model was then evaluated in 10 grapegrowers’ plots, covering a diversity of biophysical and technical contexts (soil type, canopy size, irrigation, cover crop). We identified three critical periods for yield formation: after flowering on the previous year for the number of bunches and berries, around pre-veraison and post-veraison of the same year for mean berry weight. Yields were simulated with a model efficiency (EF) of 0.62 (NRMSE = 0.28). Bud fertility and number of berries per bunch were more accurately simulated (EF = 0.90 and 0.77, NRMSE = 0.06 and 0.10, respectively) than berry weight (EF = -0.31, NRMSE = 0.17). Model efficiency on the on-farm plots reached 0.71 (NRMSE = 0.37) simulating yields from 1 to 8 kg/plant. The GraY model is an original model estimating grapevine yield evolution on the basis of water availability under future climatic conditions.  It allows to evaluate the effects of various adaptation levers such as planting density, cover crop management, fruit/leaf ratio, shading and irrigation, in various production contexts.

Impact of geographical location on the phenolic profile of minority varieties grown in Spain. II: red grapevines

Because terroir and cultivar are drivers of wine quality, is essential to investigate theirs effects on polyphenolic profile before promoting the implantation of a red minority variety in a specific area. This work, included in MINORVIN project, focuses in the polyphenolic profile of 7 red grapevines minority varieties of Vitis vinifera L. (Morate, Sanguina, Santafe, Terriza Tinta Jeromo Tortozona Tinta) and Tempranillo) from six typical viticulture Spanish areas: Aragón (A1), Cataluña (A2), Castilla la Mancha (A3), Castilla –León (A4), Madrid (A5) and Navarra (A6) of 2020 season. Polyphenolic substances were extracted from grapes. 35 compounds were identified and quantified (mg subtance/kg fresh berry) by HPLC and grouped in anthocyanins (ANT) flavanols (FLAVA), flavonols (FLAVO), hydroxycinnamic (AH), benzoic (BA) acids and stilbenes (ST). Antioxidant activity (AA, mmol TE /g fresh berry) was determined by DPPH method. The results were submitted to a two-way ANOVA to investigate the influence of variety, area and their interaction for each polyphenolic family and cluster analysis was used to construct hierarchical dendrograms, searching the natural groupings among the samples. Sanguina (A3) had the most of total polyphenols while Tempranillo (A5) those of ANT. Sanguina (A2) and (A3) reached the highest values of FLAVO, FLAVA and AA. These two last samples had also the maximum of AA. The effect cultivar and area were significant for all polyphenolic families analyzed. A high variability due to variety (>50%) was observed in FLAVA and the maximum value of variability due to growing area was detected in AA (86.41%), ANT and FLAVO (51%); the interaction variety*zone was significant only for ANT, FLAVO, EST and AA. Finally, dendrograms presented five cluster: i) Sanguina (A2); ii) Sanguina (A3); iii) Tempranillo (A5); iv) Tempranillo (A3); Terriza (A3,A5), Morate (A5,A6); v) Santafé (A1,A6); Tortozona tinta (A1,A3,A6); Tinta Jeromo (A3,A4).