Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Tuning the pH during the fermentation has a strong effect on the wine protein composition and the stability of the resulting white wines

Tuning the pH during the fermentation has a strong effect on the wine protein composition and the stability of the resulting white wines

Abstract

AIM: Previous results have shown the impact of the pH on the stability of white wine proteins. In a context of global warming that implies increases in ethanol content and pH, we wanted to compare for the same initial must (given composition in polysaccharides, polyphenols, ions, _) the impact of the pH on the protein composition after fermentation. Several white wine varieties were considered.

METHODS: Vinifications were carried out using musts from Sauvignon, Muscat, Sylvaner, Riesling, Gewurztrminer, and Pinot Gris). The pH of the initial musts was adjusted to 3.0, 3.3, 3.6 and 3.9. For each wine thus obtained, heat tests (heating at 40°C for 4 hours) were carried out and proteins were analyzed and quantified by gel electrophoresis.

RESULTS: On the whole, protein concentrations in wines decreased during fermentation. However, this decrease was more marked for the lowest pH (3.0 and 3.3), as well as for some proteins (chitinases, b-glucanases). Thus the total concentration of proteins was higher at pH 3.9. The turbidity measured after heat tests evolved differently: a maximum was observed at pH 3.6 in the present experimental conditions (40°C- 4h).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that the pH has a decisive impact on the protein composition in white wines, with higher pH favoring their conformational stability during winemaking. However, haze formation due to heat-induced denaturation of proteins is higher at high pH. This trend was observed whatever the studied variety, but with more or less haze intensities. This indicated also an impact of non-protein compounds, whose composition strongly depends on the grape variety.

DOI:

Publication date: September 14, 2021

Issue: Macrowine 2021

Type: Article

Authors

Céline Poncet-Legrand 

INRAE,Eric MEISTERMANN, IFV Aude VERNHET, Institut Agro, Montpellier SupAgro Philippe COTTEREAU, IFV Frédéric CHARRIER, IFV  Patrick CHEMARDIN, INRAE Céline PONCET-LEGRAND, INRAE

Contact the author

Keywords

white wines, haze formation, proteins, pH

Citation

Related articles…

Climate change projections to support the transition to climate-smart viticulture

The Earth’s system is undergoing major changes through a wide range of spatial and temporal scales as a response to growing anthropogenic radiative forcing, which is pushing the whole system far beyond its natural variability. Sources of greenhouse gases largely exceed their sinks, thus leading to a strengthened greenhouse effect. More energy is thereby being supplied to the system, with inevitable shifts in climatic patterns and weather regimes. Over the last decades, these modifications have been manifested in the full statistical distributions of the atmospheric variables, with dramatic changes in the frequency and intensity of extremes. Natural hazards, such as severe droughts, floods, forest fires, or heatwaves, are being triggered by extreme atmospheric events worldwide, thus threatening human activities. Viticultculture is not only exposed to changing climates but is also highly vulnerable, as grapevine phenology and physiological development are strongly controlled by atmospheric conditions. Therefore, the assessment of climate change projections for a given region is critical for climate change adaptation and risk reduction in viticulture. By adopting timely and suitable measures, the future sustainability and resiliency of the sector can be fostered. Climate-grapevine chain modelling is an essential tool for better planning and management. However, the accuracy of the resulting projections is limited by many uncertainties that must be duly taken into account when transferring knowledge to stakeholders and decision-makers. Climate-smart viticulture will comprise ensembles of locally tuned strategies, envisioning both adaptation and mitigation, assisted by emerging technologies and decision-support systems.

A predictive model of spatial Eca variability in the vineyard to support the monitoring of plant status

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.19.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

Impact of climate change on the viticultural climate of the Protected Designation of Origin “Jumilla” (SE Spain)

Protected Designation of Origin “Jumilla” (PDO Jumilla) is located in the Spanish provinces of Albacete and Murcia, in the South-eastern part of the Iberian Peninsula, where most of the models predict a severe impact of climate change in next decades. PDO Jumilla covers an area of 247,054 hectares, of which more than 22,000 hectares

Pruned vine biomass exclusion from a clay loam vineyard soil – examining the impact on physical/chemical properties

The wine industry worldwide faces increasing challenges to achieve sustainable levels of carbon emission mitigation. This project seeks to establish the feasibility of harvesting winter pruned vineyard biomass (PVB) for potential use in carbon footprint reduction, through its use as a renewable biofuel for energy production. In order to make this recommendation, technical issues such as the potential environmental impact, chemical composition and fuel suitability, and logistical challenges of harvesting biomass needs to be understood to compare with the results from similar studies. Of particular interest is the role PVB plays as a carbon source in vineyard soils and what effect annual removal might have on soil carbon sequestration. A preliminary trial was established in the Waite Campus vineyard (University of Adelaide) to test current management strategies. Vines are grown in a Eutrophic, Red Dermosol clay loam soil with well managed midrow swards. A comparison was undertaken of mid-row treatments in two 0.25 Ha blocks (Shiraz and Semillon), including annual cultivation for seed bed preparation, the deliberate exclusion of PVB (25 years) and incorporation of PVB (13 years) at an average of 3.4 and 5.5 Mg/Ha-1 for Shiraz and Semillon respectively. In both 0-10cm and 10-30cm soil core sample depths, combined soil carbon % measures in the desired range of 1.80 to 3.50, were not significantly different between treatments or cultivars and yielded an estimated 42 Mg/ha-1 of sequestered soil carbon. Other key physical and chemical measures were likewise not significantly different between treatments. Preliminary results suggest that in a temperate zone vineyard, managed such as the one used in this study, there is no long term negative impact on soil carbon sequestration through removing PVB. This implies that growers could confidently harvest PVB for use in several end fates including as a bio fuel.

Under-vine management effects on grapevine production, soil properties and plant communities in South Australia

Under-vine (UV) management has traditionally consisted of synthetic herbicide use to limit competition between weeds and grapevines. With growing global interest towards non-synthetic chemical use, this study aimed to capture the effects of alternative UV management at two commercial Shiraz vineyards in South Australia, where the sole management variables were UV management since 2016. In adjacent treatment blocks, cultivation (CU) was compared to spontaneous vegetation (SV) in McLaren Vale (MV), and herbicide was compared to SV in Eden Valley (EV). Soil water infiltration rates were slower and grapevine stem water potential was lower in CU compared to SV in MV, with the latter having a plant community dominated by soursob (Oxalis pes-caprae) during winter; while in EV, there was little separation between the treatments. Yields were affected at both sites, with SV being higher in MV and HE being higher in EV. In MV, the only effect on grape must was a lower 13C:12C isotope ratio in CU, indicating greater grapevine water stress. In the grape must at EV, SV had higher total soluble solids, total phenolics, anthocyanins, and yeast available nitrogen; and lower pH and titratable acidity. Pruning weights were not affected by the treatments in MV, while they were higher in HE at EV. Assessments revealed that the differing soil types at the two sites were likely the main determinants of the opposing production outcomes associated with UV management. In the silty loam soil of MV, the higher yields in SV were likely due to more plant-available water, as a potential result of the continuous soil bio-pores formed by winter UV vegetation. Conversely, in the loamy sand soils of EV with a lower cation exchange capacity, the lower yields and pruning weights in SV suggest the UV vegetation competed significantly with the grapevines for available water and nutrients.