New acacia gums fractions: how their features affect the foamability of sparkling base wines?

Abstract

When sparkling wine is served, the first attribute perceived is foam1. Bentonite is usually added to wine in order to cause particle flocculation, but this procedure also leads to a drastic loss of foamability2. Acacia gums improve the foamability of some sparkling base wines treated with bentonite3. Acacia gums are already authorized as additives in wine production4. We studied how the addition of new fractions from Acacia gums affected the wines foamability. Our work deepens the relationship between wine foamability and gums fractions properties. Eight sparkling base wines were elaborated by the traditional white winemaking method. Three of them were elaborated in three different regions from Spain: Malaga using Moscatel grapes as well as Saragossa and Tarragona (TA), both using Macabeo grapes. The other five base wines were elaborated in the French region of Champagne using Chardonnay (4) and Pinot noir (1) grapes. They were treated with bentonite, stirred and filtered. Acacia senegal (Asen) and Acacia seyal (Asey) gums were fractionated by Ion Exchange Chromatography giving two high (F1sen and F1sey) and two low (F2sen and F2sey) molar mass fractions. Fractions and sparkling base wines were deeply characterized. Four Acacia gums fractions were separately added to wines (300 mg·L-1), resulting in “supplemented CO-wines”. Based on shaking test, wine was vigorously hand-shaken in closed tubes. The foam height at 5 and every 10 seconds during 90 seconds was measured (all in triplicate). The maximum foam height was improved in 11 out of the 16 supplementations (69%) with F1 fractions, which were the fractions with high protein amount and high molar mass. F1sey and mainly F1sen showed a positive effect improving the foamability in Spanish wines. F1 fractions also increased foamability of French wines, but in a more inefficient and irregular pattern. Moreover, the differentials of foam height (ΔFH) between “supplemented CO-wines” and CO-wines enhanced significantly in all the studied wines at several moments after supplementations with F1 fractions. F2 fractions gave enhancing effect only sporadically. Adding F1sen and F1sey, the foam height showed positive Pearson correlations with, respectively, (i) polysaccharides rich in arabinose and galactose percentage and (ii) the number average molar mass of polysaccharides. But after F1 supplementations, the mannoproteins percentage in base wines affected negatively their foamability. The Proteins %, the hydrophobic score, the volumetric properties, the molar masses, the high molar mass ranges and the content of several amino acids of gums fractions affected positively the foamability in different wines, whereas it was negatively affected by the sugars %.Concluding, sparkling base wine foamabilities strongly depend on the wine and the gum fraction addition, but also on their relationship.

DOI:

Publication date: September 15, 2021

Issue: Macrowine 2021

Type: Article

Authors

Rafael Apolinar-Valiente, Thomas Salmo, Pascale Williams,  Michaël Nigen, Christian Sanchez, Thierry Doco,  Richard Marchal.

UMR-1208/IATE, Montpellier SupAgro, France.LOCA, Université de Reims, France. UMR-1083/SPO, INRAE-Montpellier, France. UMR-1208/IATE, Université Montpellier, France. UMR-1208/IATE, Université Montpellier, France. UMR-1083/SPO, INRAE-Montpellier, France. LVBE, Université de Haute-Alsace, Colmar, France.

Contact the author

Keywords

sparkling base wine; foam; acacia gums; ion exchange chromatography; macromolecules; sec-malls; biochemical properties; structural features

Citation

Related articles…

Different soil types and relief influence the quality of Merlot grapes in a relatively small area in the Vipava Valley (Slovenia) in relation to the vine water status

Besides location and microclimatic conditions, soil plays an important role in the quality of grapes and wine. Soil properties influence…

Climate, Viticulture, and Wine … my how things have changed!

The planet is warmer than at any time in our recorded past and increasing greenhouse emissions and persistence in the climate system means that continued warming is highly likely. Climate change has already altered the basic framework of growing grapes for wine production worldwide and will likely continue to do so for years to come. The wine sector can continue to play an important role in leading the agricultural sector in addressing climate change. From developing on…

Leaf vine content in nutrients and trace elements in La Mancha (Spain) soils: influence of the rootstock

The use of rootstock of American origin has been the classic method of fighting against Phylloxera for more than 100 years. For this reason, it is interesting to establish if different rootstock modifies nutrient composition as well as trace elements content that could be important for determining the traceability of the vine products. A survey of four classic rootstocks (110-Richter, SO4, FERCAL and 1103-Paulsen) and four new ones (M1, M2, M3 and M4) provided by Agromillora Iberia. S.L.U., all of them grafted with the Tempranillo variety, has been carried out during 2019. The eight rootstocks were planted in pots of 500 cc, on three soils with very different characteristics from Castilla-La Mancha (Spain). In the month of July, the leaves were collected and dried in a forced air oven for seven days at 40ºC. Then, the samples were prepared for the analysis determination, carried out by X-Ray fluorescence spectrometry. The results obtained showed that in the case of content in mineral elements in leaf, separated by soil type, we can report the importance of few elements such as Si, Fe, Pb and, especially, Sr. The rootstock does not influence the composition of the vine leaf for the studied elements that are the most important in determining the geochemical footprint of the soil. The influence of the soil can be discriminated according to some elements such as Fe, Pb, Si and, especially, Sr.

Deconstructing the soil component of terroir: from controversy to consensus

Wine terroir describes the collectively recognized relation between a geographical area and the distinctive organoleptic characteristics of the wines produced in it. The overriding objective in terroir studies is therefore to provide scientific proof relating the properties of terroir components to wine quality and typicity. In scientific circles, the role of climate (macro-, meso- and micro-) on grape and wine characteristics is well documented and accepted as the most critical. Moreover, there has been increasing interest in recent years about new elements with possible importance in shaping wine terroir like berry/leaf/soil microbiology or even aromatic plants in proximity to the vineyard conferring flavors to the grapes. However, the actual effect of these factors is also dependent on complex interactions with plant material (variety/clone, rootstock, vine age) and with human factors.
The contribution of soil, although a fundamental component of terroir and extremely popular among wine enthusiasts, remains a much-debated issue among researchers. The role of geology is probably the one mostly associated by consumers with the notion of terroir with different parent rocks considered to give birth to different wine styles. However, the relationship between wine properties and the underlying parent material raises a lot of controversy especially regarding the actual existence of rock-derived flavors in the wine (e.g. minerality). As far as the actual soil properties are concerned, the effect of soil physical properties is generally regarded as the most significant (e.g sandy soils being associated with lighter wines while those on clay with colored and tannic ones) mostly through control of water availability which ultimately modifies berry ripening conditions either directly by triggering biosynthetic pathways, or indirectly by altering vigor and yield components. The role of soil chemistry seems to be weakly associated to wine sensory characteristic, although N, K, S and Ca, but also soil pH, are often considered important in the overall soil effect.
Recently, in the light of evidence provided by precision agriculture studies reporting a high variability of vineyard soils, the spatial scale should also be taken into consideration in the evaluation of the soil effects on wines. While it is accepted that soil effects become more significant than climate on a local level, it is not clear whether these micro-variations of vineyard soils are determining in the terroir effect. Moreover, as terroir is not a set of only natural factors, the magnitude of the contribution of human-related factors (irrigation, fertilization, soil management) to the soil effect still remains ambiguous. Lastly, a major shortcoming of the majority of works about soil effects on wine characteristics is the absence of connection with actual vine physiological processes since all soil effects on grape and wine chemistry and sensorial properties are ultimately mediated through vine responses.
This article attempts to breakdown the main soil attributes involved in the terroir effect to suggest an improved understanding about soil’s true contribution to wine sensory characteristics. It is proposed that soil parameters per se are not as significant determining factors in the terroir effect but rather their mutual interactions as well as with other natural and human factors included in the terroir concept. Consequently, similarly to bioclimatic indices, composite soil indices (i.e. soil depth, water holding capacity, fertility, temperature etc), incorporating multiple soil parameters, might provide a more accurate and quantifiable means to assess the relative weight of the soil component in the terroir effect.

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.