Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Volatile and phenolic profiles of wines closed with different stoppers and stored for 30 months

Volatile and phenolic profiles of wines closed with different stoppers and stored for 30 months

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the volatile and phenolic profiles of three red and one rosé wines stored in bottles for 30 months. Four wines were provided by a winery located in South Tyrol (Kellerei Bozen, Bolzano, Italy), which included Merlot, Lagrein red, Lagrein rosé and St. Magdalener and were closed with different types of stoppers: a blend of natural cork microgranules and polymers without glue addition (Supercap Nature, Mombaroccio, Italy), a one-piece natural cork, agglomerated natural cork and a technical cork 1+1. Volatile compounds were extracted by head-space solid phase microextraction (HS-SPME) and then analysed by GC-MS, while the phenolic compounds were determined by HPLC-DAD-FLD. The type of stopper did not show significant differences on the chemical profiles of the wines. Instead, the interaction between the wines and the type of stoppers as well as the type of wines had a significant influence on the volatile and phenolic profiles. Regarding the volatile profile, significant differences were observed for ethyl butanoate and 2-hydroxyethylpropanoate which were present just in St. Magdalener and absent in Lagrein rosé wines, respectively. Also, 2-methylethyl butanoate and 3-methylethyl butanoate were not detected in both Lagrein red and rosé, whereas isopentyl acetate was found in Merlot wines at low concentration. On the other hand, 1-hexanol, ethyl hexanoate, ethyl octanoate and ethyl decanoate were found at high concentration in Lagrein rosé wine compared to the three red wines. Regarding the phenolic profile, results showed a low concentration of p-coumaric acid, protocatechuic acid, caftaric acid, (+)-catechin, (-)-epicatechin, S-glutathionyl caftaric acid (GRP) and syringic acid in Lagrein rosé wine with respect to the red wines. However, the concentration of gallic acid was higher in Merlot wine and differed significantly from the three others with the lowest value in the Lagrein rosé. The chemical profiles of the four wines were significantly influenced by the type of wine due to their grape variety and vinification processes. Conversely, the type of stopper did not show any significant differences in terms of volatile nor phenolic profile, due to the high technical quality of the closures under study.

DOI:

Publication date: September 14, 2021

Issue: Macrowine 2021

Type: Article

Authors

Prudence Fleur Tchouakeu Betnga

Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy ,Edoardo LONGO, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy Vakare MERKYTE, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy Amanda DUPAS DE MATOS, Feast Lab, Massey University, New Zealand Fabrizio ROSSETTI, Mérieux NutriSciences, Italy   Emanuele BOSELLI, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy

Contact the author

Keywords

cork stoppers; technical stoppers; volatile profile; phenolic profile; wines; bottle

Citation

Related articles…

Trace-level analysis of phosphonate in wine and must by ion chromatography with inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (IC-ICP-MS).

Phosphonic acid and especially potassium dihydrogen phosphonate are widely used to restrain the ubiquitous pressure of grapevine downy mildew in viticulture. Nevertheless, phosphonic acid and its derivatives have been banned in organic viticulture in October 2013, because they have been classified as plant protection products since then.

Podcasts – Terroir Congress 2020

All about “Australian grapevine stories”

Preliminary characterisation of mannoproteins from different wine yeast strains and impact on wine properties

Mannoproteins (MPs) are released from the yeast cell wall during alcoholic fermentation and aging on the lees, and influence aspects of wine quality such as haze formation and colour stability. Yet, as this is a slow process with microbiological and sensory risks, the exogenous addition of extracted MPs poses an efficient alternative. While Saccharomyces cerevisiae has long been studied as a prominent source for MPs extraction, their structure and composition greatly differ between yeast species. This may influence their behaviour in the wine matrix and subsequent impact on wine properties. However, although wine yeast species other than S. cerevisiae possibly present an untapped source of MPs, they are still ill-characterised in terms of chemical composition and influence on wine.

The role of mechanization in zone/terroir expression

Vineyard mechanization will be addressed in this review paper primarily as related to pruning and harvesting since these operations typically require a great deal of the total yearly labour demand (Intrieri and Poni, 1998). However, to be able to define how mechanization interacts with “terroir”, a rigorous definition of the latter term is needed.

EFFECTS OF BIODYNAMIC VINEYARD MANAGEMENT ON GRAPE RIPENING MECHANISMS

Biodynamic agriculture, founded in 1924 by Rudolph Steiner, is a form of organic agriculture. Through a holistic approach, biodynamic agriculture seeks to preserve the diversity of agriculture and the existing interactions between the mineral world and the different components of the organic world. Biodynamic grape production involves the use of composts, herbal teas and mineral preparations such as 500, 501 and CBMT.
Several scientific studies have provided evidence on the effects of biodynamic farming on the soil, the plant and the wine. Numerous empirical opinions of wine growers support the existence of differences brought by such a management.